Ha 


LIBKARY 

OF    TnK 

PltllVCETOIV,  ]¥.  J. 


DONATION   OF 


SAMUKI.    AGNKW, 

C      /l  /L  /  ^'  F     P  H  ]  .  A  D  E  I.  P  H  I  A  .    P  A  . 

^^^'- lA-J     ^ 


No. 

1)     *^**'  ^1 

S         Shelf,   ■  .p 


^  . 


A 


DISSERTATION 


ON  THE 


BY  JAMES  KIDD,  D.  D. 


PROFESS  OR    OF    ORIENTAL   LAJfGUAGES    IN    MARISCHAL-COLLEGE 
AND    UNIVERSITY    OF    ABERDEEN,    &,C.  Lc. 


PHILADELPHIA : 

PUBLISHED  AND  SOLD  BY  ALEXANDER  TOWAR, 

No.  255,  Market  Street. 

J.  Anderson,  Printer. 

1823. 


TO 

The  Reverend  ASHBEL  GREEN,  D.D.  LL.D. 


The  Reverend  GEORGE  C.  POTTS, 

jMINISTER   of    the    fourth    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH    IX 
PHILADELPHIA, 

THE  FOLLOWING  DISSERTATION 

IS,    WITH    MUCH   RESPECT, 

ESTEEM,   AND    GRATITUDE, 
INSCRIBED,   BY 

THE  AUTHOR. 


CONTENTS. 


Page 
Preface "7 — 8 

CHAPTER  I. 
Introduction --    9 — 20^ 

CHAPTER  n. 
The  principles  connected  with  the  subject,  in  which  the 
supporters  and  opponents  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eternal 
Sonship  agree ~ 21 — 28 

CHAPTER  III. 
The  principles  in  which  the  supporters   and  opponents 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eternal  Sonship  may  or  may  not 
agree 29--36 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Meaning  of  the  term  'o  \oyc?,  The  Word, 37 — 43 

CHAPTER  V. 

Observations  on  terms  expressing  Related  Staies — Proof 
of  the  Eternal  Sonship  from  the  qualities  describing 
the  Second  Person  in  the  Godhead,  and  from  the  dif- 
ferent expressions  of  Scripture  respecting  him 44 — "74 

CHAPTER  VI. 
Examination  of  Passages  of  Scripture,  which  prove  our 

Lord's  Sonship  to  be  Eternal 75 — 120 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Continuation  of  the  Examination  of  Passages  of  Scrip- 
ture, which  prove  the  Sonship  of  Christ  to  be  Eternal     121 — 167 


vi  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  Vm.  Pagf- 
Dedaration  of  our  Lord,  concerning  his  Eternal  Son- 
ship  - 168—217 

CHAPTER  IX. 

General  Observations  on  Passages  of  Scripture,  declaring 
the  Eternal  Sonship  of  our  Lord 218 — 24?» 

CHAPTER  X. 

Observations  on  the  expression  Son  of  Man 250 — 266 

CHAPTER  XI. 

Objections  to  the  Eternal  Sonship  of  our  Lord,  founded 
on  assumed  meanings  of  Scripture,  refuted 267 — 287' 

CHAPTER  XII. 
The  Word  and  The  Son  are  both  designations  to  which 

eternity  is  attributable 288 — 297 

CHAPTER  XIII. 
Examination  of  the  term  Father,  in  connexion  with  the 
term  Son,  when  used  to  designate  Persons  in  the  Di- 
vine nature 298 — 318 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

Opinions  of  some  of  the  Fathers,  Reformers  of  the  Church, 
S^c.  respecting  the  Eternal  Sonship  of  Christ 319 — 354 

Conclusion   - - -  -  -  -  355 — 356 


PREFACE. 


The  doctrine  of  the  Eternal  Sonship  of 
Jesus  Christ  has  been  received  by  the  Ortho- 
dox Church  in  all  ages. — Of  late  years,  how- 
ever, its  truth  has  been  questioned  ;  and  the 
subject  has,  in  consequence,  become  a  topic 
of  controversy  amongst  different  classes  of 
Christians  of  no  inconsiderable  standing  in 
the  religious  world. — Induced  by  this  discus- 
sion to  examine  the  question  with  particular 
care, — the  Author  presents  to  the  public  the 
result  of  his  inquiries.  His  object  has  not 
been  to  meet  all  the  cavils  of  controvertists, 
but,  as  far  as  possible,  to  ascertain  the  exact 
tenor  of  Scripture.  He  trusts  his  research 
has  been  conducted  with  impartiality  and 
candour.  It  has  been  undertaken  without 
the  most  distant  feeling  of  prejudice  against 
the  opposers  of  the  doctrine  which  he  has 


VIll  PREFACE. 

vindicated  ;  several  of  whom  he  ranks  among 
his  correspondents,  and  most  esteemed  per- 
sonal friends. 

Though  the  following  JDissertation  forms, 
by  itself,  a  distinct  work, — the  Author  pre- 
sumes to  think  that  it  may  be  read  with  ad- 
ditional advantage  after  his  "  Essay  on  the 
Doctrine  of  the  Trinity, "^^ 


DISSERTATION 


mtvml  %omm  of  efit(^t< 


CHAPTER  I. 


Introduction, 

Man,  in  every  age,  has  directed  his  atten- 
tion to  that  superior  power  by  which  the 
energies  of  creation  are  wielded.  From  the 
contemplation  of  himself,  and  the  beings 
with  whom  he  mingles,  he  has  been  directed, 
either  through  the  medium  of  sense  or  re- 
flection, to  survey  that  which  is  mightier 
than  himself  or  his  fellows.  An  impulse, 
undefined,  inherent  in  his  nature,  has  led 
him  to  conclude,  that  all  power  does  not  stop 
within  those  limits  by  which  he  feels  him- 
self circumscribed  ;  and  his  excursive  facul- 
ties have  carried  him  in  quest  of  the  last  link 


10  THE    ETERrAL    SONSHIP 

in  the  chain  of  the  universe.  A  something, 
within,  tells  him,  that  the  displays  of  intelli- 
gence, or  the  emotions  of  affection,  are  allied 
to  objects  greater  than  the  sensible  beings 
whom  he  beholds.  This  conviction  has  in- 
duced him  to  undertake  and  prolong  the 
search  for  that  superintending  principle,  by 
which,  in  consequence  of  its  greater  power, 
he  concludes  that  his  happiness  or  sufferings 
are  affected.  He  has  ransacked  the  earth, 
he  has  held  converse  with  the  stars,  he  has 
invoked  creation  around  him,  he  has  sought 
to  enter  the  recesses,  dark,  fleeting,  and  illu- 
sive, beyond  him,  to  obtain  the  knowledge 
and  propitiate  the  favour  of  this  pervading 
might.  The  opinions  which  man  has  formed, 
and  the  conclusions  which  he  has  drawn  on 
this  subject,  depend  on  the  means  afforded 
him  to  develope  the  intricacy,  and  on  the 
state  of  the  powers  of  his  mind  which  are 
employed  in  the  evolution  of  these  means, 
to  acquire  the  wished-for  result.  But  the 
actual  condition  of  man  has  proved  an  in- 
superable barrier  in  the  pursuit.  It  is  the 
repelling  influence  which  has  resisted  his 
progress  and  defeated  his  attempt.  Corrupt 
in  his  nature,  and  depraved  in  his  desires, 
he  has  desired   to   find  this  superior  being 


OF    CHRIST.  11 

"  like  unto  himself,"  that  his  wishes  might  be 
gratified,  without  fear.  Limited  in  his  know^- 
ledge,  his  ken  has  been  unable  to  exercise  the 
means  in  his  power.  Degraded  in  his  con- 
ceptions, he  has,  in  general,  figured  out  one 
w^hose  greatness  consists  in  uncontrolled  vice, 
and  whose  power  is  exhibited  in  the  fulfil- 
ment of  unhallowed  passions.  Confined  bj 
his  senses,  his  research  has  been  fettered 
w^ithin  the  circle  of  sense.  Though  the  pur- 
suit, in  itself,  is  the  greatest  wisdom,  his  me- 
thod of  conducting  it  exhibits  one  continued 
career  of  folly,  ending  in  the  most  deplorable 
consequences.  "  Professing  themselves  to  be 
wdse,  they  became  fools,  and  changed  the 
glory  of  the  uncorruptible  God  into  an  image 
made  like  to  corruptible  man,  and  to  birds, 
and  four-footed  beasts,  and  creeping  things." 
Thus  •' darkness  covered  the  earth,  and  gross 
darkness  the  people;"  thus  the  world  was 
overwhelmed  with  the  gods,  the  images,  and 
altars,  and  temples,  and  oracles,  the  lust  and 
murders,  and  unutterable  crimes  of  Poly- 
theism. The  research,  calculated  in  its  own 
nature  to  lead  to  the  happiest  results,  from 
the  mode  of  conducting  it,  devastcd  man- 
kind with  a  crowd  of  woes ;  and  the  wrecks 
of  that  soul,  which  man  himself  had  over- 


12  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

thrown,  were  devoted  to  "  the  creature,  more 
than  the  Creator."  Yet,  in  the  midst  of  this 
desolation,  some  minds  arose  to  shed  streaks 
of  light  "  athwart  the  gloom  profound.'-  A 
congeries  of  those  who  elevated  themselves 
from  the  surrounding  ruin  have  left  record 
that  they  did  not  wholly  subscribe  to  the 
demoralizing  creed,  and,  by  their  precepts, 
have  endeavoured  to  inculcate,  if  not  pure — 
purer  sentiments  and  practice,  than  then 
swayed  mankind.  Yet  the  wisest  of  these 
philosophers  were  able  to  advance  but  a  few 
steps  in  that  path  where  the  rest  of  men 
had  gone  so  lamentably  astray.  Their  great- 
est efforts  were  only  valuable,  in  comparison 
with  the  existing  ignorance ;  they  were  un- 
satisfied with  their  own  attempts;  and  So- 
crates, the  greatest  of  these  sages,  has  left  on 
record  the  inefficacy  of  their  attainments, 
imless  He  whom  they  sought  should  seek 
man,  and  proclaim  to  him  the  nature  and 
will  of  that  Being  "whose  goings  forth"  he 
could  not  scan.  That  Being  has  sought  man, 
and  has  revealed  himself  to  him;  the  pro- 
clamation of  "  glad  tidings"  has  been  made  ; 
the  messenger,  foretold  by  prophets  and 
hymned  by  poets,  has  come,  and,  in  his  com- 
ing, has  brought  "  healing  in  his  wings"  to 


OF    CHRIST.  13 

the  disordered  soul.  In  the  inspired  scrip- 
tures, man  is  told  what  he  is,  and  what  the 
great  First  Cause  is  ;  what  the  Deity  has  re- 
quired of  him,  and  what  the  Deity  will  per- 
form in  his  behalf.  This  volume  unfolds,  as 
far  as  it  is  necessary  for  the  moral  being  to 
know,  and  as  far  as  his  faculties  can  compre- 
hend, the  doctrine,  the  nature,  and  qualities 
of  that  God,  "  with  whom  we  have  to  do." 
On  the  importance  of  a  right  knowledge  of 
the  Deity  we  do  not  now  expatiate :  that 
knowledge  is  the  foundation  of  all  our  hopes, 
in  time  and  eternity.  The  consequences  of 
ignorance  of  his  nature  are  visible  in  what 
the  heathen  world  was,  and  is ;  "  as  they  did 
not  like  to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge, 
God  gave  them  over  to  a  reprobate  mind." 
The  command  of  God,  most  frequently 
urged,  is,  to  knoio  himself— -to  know  that  "  he 
is  the  Lord."  When  he  smiles  upon  his 
people,  well  pleased ;  when  his  "  compas- 
sions" for  their  ignorance  "  flow,  and  fail 
not ;"  when  he  "  sets  his  eyes  upon  them  for 
good" — his  promise,  indicative  of  his  purpose 
of  love,  is,  *'  I  will  give  them  an  heart  to  know 
me,  that  I  am  the  Lord."  When  the  pro- 
phet sees  the  days  of  the  Messiah,  revealing 
the  nature  and  will  of  God,  he  describes  the 
2 


14  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

Spirit  of  the  Lord  as  resting  upon  him — "  the 
spirit  of  wisdom  and  understanding,  the  spi- 
rit of  counsel  and  might,  the  spirit  of  know- 
ledge and  of  the  fear  of  the  Lord."  This 
spirit  is  said  to  "  make  him  quick  of  under- 
standing in  the  fear  of  the  Lord."  All  know- 
ledge is  said  to  be  absorbed  in  this  know- 
ledge— "  the  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning 
of  knowledge."  The  voice  of  nature,  evident 
in  the  efforts  of  man,  without  revelation, 
through  the  ages  of  Paganism ;  the  voice  of 
heaven,  in  the  revelation  which  it  has  made  ; 
the  voice  of  that  Spirit  which  first  "  breathed 
into  man's  nostrils  the  breath  of  life,"  when 
he  "  became  a  living  soul,"  is,  to  that  soul 
— Know  Me.  Accordingly,  the  Christian 
churches  have,  in  all  periods,  treated  this 
doctrine  as  the  most  important  of  their  be- 
lief, because  it  involves  within  itself  all  other 
articles  of  faith  and  practice.  The  summary 
which  they  have  found,  when  searching  the 
scriptures,  is,  that  God,  in  his  essence,  is  one 
and  indivisible ;  and  that,  in  that  essence, 
there  are  three  Persons,  in  related  states,  viz. 
the  Eternal  Father,  the  Eternal  Son,  and  the 
Eternal  Holy  Ghost. 

Centuries  have  passed  over  Christendom ; 
it  has  had  its  dark  and  its  enlightened  eras, 


OF    CHRIST.  15 

its  corrupt  and  reformed  churches,  its  philo- 
sophical and  theological  advocates — and  this 
belief,  collateral  with  that  of  a  Trinity,  has 
been  firm  as  the  belief  of  Divinity  itself. 
But,  in  recent  years,  a  new  opinion  has  been 
boldly  announced,  and  ingeniously  maintain- 
ed, that,  while  the  scriptures  reveal  the  ex- 
istence of  three  persons  in  the  Godhead,  they 
have  not  revealed  their  existence,  as  regards 
two  of  these  Persons,  in  the  related  states  of 
Eternal  Father  and  Eternal  Son.  Philoso- 
phy, philology,  criticism,  and  authorities, 
have  been  employed  in  this  speculation. 

The  object  of  the  following  observations 
is  to  maintain,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  re- 
lated state  of  Eternal  Son,  or  the  Eternal 
Sonship  of  the  second  Person  of  the  Trinity, 
is  revealed  in  *'  the  scripture  of  truth." 

In  this  investigation,  the  inspired  volume 
is  the  uniform  standard  to  which  the  writer 
wishes  to  adhere — comparing  scripture  with 
scripture,  and  deducing  legitimate  inferences 
from  the  obvious  import  of  its  contents. 
Such  an  investigation,  conducted  with  the 
humility  and  reverence  which  the  subject 
requires,  is  calculated,  by  the  process,  and  by 
the  conclusion  attained,  to  enlarge  our  views 
of  God,    as  he  has  revealed  his  nature — to 


16 


THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 


expand  the  capacity  in  the  contemplation  of 
the  grandeur  of  Him  who  fills  heaven  and 
earth  with  his  glory — to  illustrate  the  self- 
existent  aspect  of  the  being  of  God,  and  his 
redeeming  aspect  in  the  restoration  of  man 
— and  to  explore  the  everlasting  purpose  of 
the  glorious  Three,  who,  in  their  eternally 
related  states,  said,  in  consultation,  "  Let  us 
make  man ;"  and  who,  in  the  developement 
of  that  purpose,  have  created  man  anew.  It 
is  an  investigation  calculated  to  elevate  the 
immortal  spirit  to  communion  with  Him, 
who,  in  immense  love  and  intelligence,  "  in- 
habiting the  depths  of  eternity,"  has'  infused 
love  and  intelligence  into  the  angelic  armies 
of  heaven — into  the  "  just  men  made  per- 
fect"— and,  in  a  state  of  progressive  improve- 
ment, into  those  inhabitants  of  earth  whom 
he  has  chosen.  The  examination  conduces, 
when  properly  conducted,  to  a  charitable  and 
beneficent  frame  of  mind.  It  is  not  respect- 
ing the  fact,  whether  Jesus  Christ  be  a  Di- 
vine Person,  equal  with  the  Father,  but 
whether  he  exist,  as  that  Divine  Person,  in 
the  related  state  of  Eternal  Son,  There  is 
no  scope,  arising  from  the  subject  itself,  for 
ihe  display  of  angry  passions  or  polemical 
weapons.     The  position,  sought  to  be  esta- 


OF    CHRIST.  17 

blished,  is  not,  whether  our  Lord  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ  be  God,  but  whether,  as  God,  his 
title  and  mode  of  existence  be  the  Son  of  God. 
Regarding,  therefore,  pure  uncreated  essence, 
employed  in  the  research  of  that  God  who  is 
love,  the  survey  ought  not  to  produce  dis- 
cordant feelings ;  but  ought,  in  the  spirit  of 
him,  whom  we  seek  to  discover  in  his  own  re- 
velation, to  reflect  that  love,  the  eternally 
related  state  of  which,  in  the  persons  of  the 
Godhead,  it  is  our  essay  to  explore.  The 
question  ought  not  to  engender  one  unhar- 
monious  emotion.  It  does  not,  in  its  more 
immediate  aspect,  refer  to  man  or  his  con- 
dition ;  it  does  not  teach  what  he  is,  but  what 
God  is.  Yet,  in  its  consequences,  man's  best 
interests  are  involved,  and,  when  the  deci- 
sion is  properly  deduced  from  the  word  of 
God,  his  interest,  in  the  result,  is  intense. 
We  are  placed,  by  the  issue  of  this  question, 
on  a  position  which  connects  us  with  past 
and  future  ages.  We  are  either  to  hail  the 
belief  of  the  churches  in  this  doctrine,  con- 
veyed through  eighteen  centuries,  as  a  part 
of  the  ''  faith  once  delivered,"  by  Christ, 
"  to  the  saints,"  or,  as  the  fallacious  decision 
of  those,  who,  either  from  ignorance  or  de- 
ceit, acquiesced  in  *'  a  cunningly  devised 
2* 


IB  THE    ETERNAL    SOxNSHlF 

fable."  We  are  especially  interested  in  the 
effects  which  will  be  produced  on  posterity, 
to  whom,  by  our  belief  or  disbelief  hi  this 
doctrine,  according  to  the  word  of  God,  we 
are  either  to  tiansmit  a  troubled  and  tainted 
stream  of  error,  or  a  flow  of  pure  and  unadul- 
terated truth.  But,  the  position  attempted 
to  be  proved,  does  not  depend  on  the  vene- 
rable sanction  of  antiquity,  or  on  the  dic- 
tates of  Fathers,  Reformers,  Councils,  or 
Synods ;  we  rely  on  revelation  alone,  as  far 
as  understood  by  us,  in  the  word  of  truth. — 
We  do  not  condemn  vigorous  research  and 
philosophical  inquiry  into  any  system  which 
has  been  established ;  but,  if  no  other  proof 
of  its  truth  be  found,  except  its  antiquity, 
and  the  illustrious  names  associated  with  it, 
— let  it  fall.  We  do  not  condemn  any  opi- 
nion because  it  is  new.  We  do  not  oppose 
those  who  deny  the  Eternal  Sonship  of 
Christ,  because  their  tenets  are  compara- 
tively novel ;  but,  because  we  apprehend 
these  tenets  are  contrary  to  the  Scriptures. 
Neither  the  shade  of  antiquity,  nor  the  glare 
of  novelty,  can  interrupt  the  steady  light 
which  unalterable  truth  casts  on  its  prin- 
ciples. 

An  objection  may  be  made,  by  some,  to 


OF    CHRIST.  19 

this  undertaking,  that  the  subject  is  too  ab- 
struse,— too  intricate  to  be  unravelled, — and 
that  it  is  soaring  too  far  into  "  the  deep 
things  of  God."  The  objection  conceals  it- 
self in  a  petitio  principii,  a  begging  of  the 
question.  The  very  point  at  issue  is,  that  God 
has  made  a  clear  and  specific  revelation  that 
Christ  is  the  Eternal  Son  of  God,  and  that, 
though  in  one  sense,  all  the  ways  of  God  are 
mysterious, — though  "  clouds  and  darkness 
are  round  about  him,"  yet,  the  doctrine,  and 
objects  announced  in  his  word,  as  the  objects 
of  belief,  must  be  approachable  by  the  intel- 
lect. In  other  words,  the  Bible  was  pro- 
mulgated to  be  understood.  The  opponents 
of  the  doctrine  contended  for,  as  well  as  its 
adherents,  are  agreed  in  one  point,  viz.  that 
the  subject  may  be  understood  by  a  correct 
knowledge  of  the  Bible.  To  it  they  both 
appeal  for  the  confirmation  or  rejection  of 
their  respective  tenets.  We  shall  now  make 
this  appeal,  and  commence  the  investigation 
of  the  subject. 

This  Dissertation,  on  the  Eternal  Sonship 
of  Christ,  will  naturally  be  divided  into  three 
series  of  positions. 


20  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

I.  The  principles  connected  with  the  sub- 
ject, in  which  the  supporters  and  opponents 
of  the  doctrine  agree. 

II.  The  principles  in  which  they  may  or 
may  not  agree. 

III.  The  principles  which  are  maintained 
by  the  supporters,  and  denied  by  the  oppo- 
nents, of  the  doctrine. 

May  truth,  not  victory,  be  our  aim ! — May 
Christian  love  and  knowledge,  not  party  zeal 
and  prejudice,  be  our  guidance !  May  glory 
to  God  be  the  result ! 


OF    CHRIST,  21 


CHAPTER  IL 


The  principles  connected  with  the  subject^  in 
which  the  supporters  and  opponents  of  the 
doctrine  agree. 

These  parties  both  agree  in  the  doctrine  of 
the  Unity  of  the  Divine  Essence^  and  the  sub- 
sistence of  Three  Persons  in  that  Essence. 

It  is  proper  to  remark,  at  this  stage  of  our 
observations,  that  we  assume  as  granted,  the 
existence  of  the  Trinity  in  Unity.  This  con- 
troversy does  not  embrace  the  subject  of  the 
Trinity,  or  involve  the  discussion  of  the  Di- 
vinity of  Christ. — The  reader  will  readily 
perceive  the  exact  point  at  issue.  It  is  this  : 
The  existence  of  three  persons  in  the  God- 
head is  mutually  admitted.  The  perfect 
Divinity  of  Christ,  as  well  as  his  perfect  hu- 
manity, or  that  he  is  "  God  and  man  in  two 
distinct  natures,  and  one  person,  for  ever," 
is  mutually  admitted.  The  question  is,  whe- 
ther this  person,  who  is  perfect  God,  is,  as 
a  Divine  person,  the  Eternal  Son  of  God. 
There  is  no  dispute  between  us  and  those 


22  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

who  deny  the  Eternal  Sonship,  respecting  his 
nature,  and  his  perfections  inherent  in  that 
nature ;  but  the  object  of  controversy  is  res- 
pecting the  mode  of  relation  which  exists  be- 
tAveen  this  person  and  the  other  two  persons 
of  the  Godhead.  In  one  word,  we  do  not 
contend  against  Unitarians,  Socinians,  and 
Arians,  but  against  those,  who,  fully  acknow- 
ledging the  Deity  of  Christ,  deny  his  Eternal 
Sonship.  As,  therefore,  the  principles  which 
we  have  now  mentioned  are  the  subjects  of 
mutual  agreement,  there  can  be  no  room  for 
controversial  remarks  on  these  topics. 

Chequered  as  the  history  of  the  church  of 
Christ  has  been,  and  though  its  aspect  has 
presented  every  varied  appearance  of  faithful 
adherence  or  determined  hostility  to  the  truth, 
yet,  as  a  collective  body,  it  has  preserved 
entire  this  grand  article  of  its  belief — the 
existence  of  the  Godhead  in  Trinity.  The 
early  introduction  of  an  insidious  philosophy 
amongst  many  of  its  votaries,  aided  by  all  the 
deceitful  efforts  of  the  great  and  opulent,  did 
not  undermine  the  reliance  on  this  doctrine. 
The  arm  of  power  could  not  crush  it;  the 
power  of  an  Emperor  could  not  remove  it ; 
the  iirc  of  persecution  could  not  extirpate, 
nor  the  smile  of  treacherous  accommodation 


.    Of    CHRIST.  23 

allure  its  adherents.  Though  every  other 
Christian  principle  has,  at  one  period  or 
other,  been  apparently  lost  in  the  tide  of  er- 
ror, or  buried  in  the  darkness  of  bigotry,  and 
of  a  philosophy,  falsely,  so  called, — this  prin- 
ciple has  withstood  the  flood,  and  appeared 
through  the  gloom.  When  the  Christian 
church,  by  the  efforts  of  malignity,  was  dis- 
united into  warring  parties,  this  doctrine 
could  not  be  dissevered  from  those,  whose 
mutual  opposition  was  displayed  in  every 
other  point,  except  in  the  retention  of  this 
doctrine. 

The  three  grand  divisions  of  Christendom, 
viz.  the  Greek,  Roman  Catholic,  and  Protes- 
tant churches,  whatever  virulence  they  may 
have  exhibited  to  each  other,  in  other  mat- 
ters, have  maintained,  in  its  integrity,  their 
adhesion  to  the  Triune  principle. — Though 
the  crescent  has  triumphed  over  the  cross,  in 
the  loveliest  domains  of  the  Greek  church, — 
though  that  church  has  debased  the  purity  of 
the  faith,  and  the  fiends  of  superstition,  of 
ignorance,  and  vice,  have  been  let  loose 
through  its  territories, — though  Christian  be- 
nevolence must  sigh  over  its  Caloyers  and 
Papas  in  prostration  before  the  Panagia, — 
though  desolation  has  marked  its  reis^n  over 


24  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

the  seat  of  the  seven  churches,  and  their 
"  candlestick  has  been  removed  out  of  its 
place ;" — still,  we  trust,  there  w^ill,  even  there, 
be  found  some,  who  have  "  held  fast"  what 
they  "  first  received  and  heard."  Through 
an  overruling  Providence,  they  have  still  re- 
tained the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Three,  and 
the  atonement  of  the  Son  of  God.  Even 
now,*  the  Christian  heart  beats  in  unison 
with  these  descendants  of  the  great  and  good. 
The  long-lowered  banner  of  the  Cross,  un- 
furled from  its  dust  and  humiliation,  floats 
over  the  Parthenon,  on  the  Acropolis  of 
Athens.  While  the  symbol,  reared  by  Con- 
stantine,  leads  to  the  battle  for  religion  and 
liberty,  against  the  tyrant  Moslem ;  and  the 
hopes  and  wishes  of  every  free-born  spirit 
are  congenial  with  those  of  the  struggling 
Greeks — the  hopes  and  wishes  of  the  belie- 
ver's spirit,  for  the  restoration  of  purity  of 
faith,  and  for  freedom  to  the  enslaved  soul, 
are  excited  by  the  remembrance  that  those, 
combating  for  earthly  liberty  from  that  hill 
where  Paul  preached,  retain  the  faith  of  that 
Godhead  which  he  declared.  Though  the 
annals   of  the   Roman  Catholic  church  are 

^  September,  1821. 


OF    CHRIST.  25 

Stained  with  blood,  and  its  details  exhibit  a 
frightful  catalogue  of  errors  and  crimes,  yet 
the  truth  of  this  fundamental  doctrine  has 
been  inviolably  maintained,  and  has  survived 
the  general  wreck  which  men  were  permitted 
to  make  of  the  rest  of  the  Christian  edifice. 
It  is  one  of  the  peculiar  glories  of  the  different 
churches  of  Protestantism,  that,  in  all  the 
Creeds  which  they  have  drawn  up,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  has  been  the  prominent 
article.  This  has  been  their  comfort  in  the 
hour  of  adversity,  and  the  test  of  their  fellow- 
ship in  the  time  of  prosperity.  They  have 
retained  it  in  the  fertile  regions  and  thronged 
cities  of  Europe  ;  they  have  carried  it  to  the 
swamps  and  deserts  of  America. — Admiring 
their  resolute  adherence  to  this  doctrine,  we, 
however,  deprecate  every  species  of  persecu- 
tion, or  civil  impediment,  to  which  those  of 
opposite  sentiments  have  been  exposed,  and 
rejoice  that  just  notions  of  liberality  have,  in 
the  present  day,  removed  the  obstacles  which 
ought  never  to  interrupt  the  civil  rights  of  those 
who  differ  from  the  rest  of  the  community  in 
opinions  purely  religious.  The  churches, 
which  have  been  connected  by  interest  or  con- 
tiguity, have  not  only  upheld  this  principle,  but 
those,  who  have  been  for  ages  separated  from, 
3 


26  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

and  unconnected  with,  the  rest  of  Christen- 
dom, and  whose  very  existence  was  unknown 
by  the  nations  of  Europe,  have  kept  this  article 
of  faith.  The  Christian  religion,  professed 
in  Abyssinia,  and  in  the  churches  recently 
discovered  in  India,  has,  in  the  insulated  situ- 
ation of  these  churches,  and  in  their  long  se- 
clusion from  all  other  believing  nations,  main- 
tained the  faith  of  the  Trinity  derived  from 
the  apostles.  The  homage  of  earthly  poten- 
tates is  simultaneously  rendered  by  European 
States,  whose  treaties  of  concord  and  amity 
are  concluded  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  and 
Undivided  Trinity.  The  two  greatest  ene- 
mies of  Christianity,  the  Jews  and  Moslems, 
have  united  in  the  rejection  of  this  doctrine ; 
and  the  Christian  world,  in  the  expression  of 
its  faith,  in  a  national  or  church  capacity,  has 
united  to  maintain  this  doctrine. 

The  second  principle,  in  which  both  parties 
agree,  is,  that  the  Supreme  Being,  in  his  pro- 
cedure with  created  intelligeiices,  and  in  his 
exhibitions  to  them^  declares  that  he  exists  in 
states  of  personality,  whether  these  are  de- 
nominated Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  or 
are  known  by  other  collateral  designations. 
We  and  our  opponents  agree,  that  God,  in 
his  dealings  with  man,  has  announced  that 


OF    CHRIST.  27 

the  persons,  in  his  essence,  act  in  a  related 
capacity  in  man's  redemption,  being;  termed 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 
The  opponents  of  the  Eternal  Son  ship  ad- 
vance, that  the  person  who  more  immediately 
accomplished  oiu*  redemption,  became  Son 
when  he  assumed  our  nature,  and  appeared 
on  earth ;  while  its  advocates  affirm  that  this 
assumption  did  not  constitute  his  Sonship, 
which  is  essential  to  the  Divine  nature,  and 
consequently  eternal.  We  wish,  particular- 
ly, to  impress  on  our  readers,  the  difference 
between  the  principle  in  which  both  agree, 
viz.  the  existence  of  the  acknowledged  re- 
lated states  in  the  Godhead,  as  regards  man ; 
and  the  principle,  which  we  are  subsequently 
to  attempt  to  explain,  viz.  the  existence  of 
these  related  states,  as  regards  the  Godhead 
itself.  The  one  is  constituted  by  the  aspect 
of  the  Divinity  to  man ;  the  other  is  consti- 
tuted by  the  aspect  which  the  Divinity  has  to 
itself.  For  example  :  when  that  person,  who 
accomplished  our  redemption,  is  termed  the 
Priest  of  the  church,  his  Priesthood  arises 
from  the  aspect  w^hich  he  bears  to  man ;  his 
Priesthood,  and  the  existence  of  man,  are 
necessarily  and  mutually  co-relative,  as  he 
could  not  be  Priest  of  the  church  without  the 


28  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

existence  of  man.  But,  when  we  examine 
his  designation  of  immutable  God,  this  has 
reference  to  the  Divinity  totally  independent 
of  creation,  as  the  quality  of  immutability, 
and  his  own  being,  are  essentially  coeval. 
When  the  supporters  and  opponents  of  the 
Eternal  Sonship  agree  concerning  the  perso- 
nality of  the  Godhead,  as  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Spirit,  the  latter  refer  to  the  procedure 
of  these  three  toward  creation.  When  the 
former  announce  their  view  of  the  doctrine, 
they  refer  to  the  existence  of  Deity,  indepen- 
dent of  creation,  and  maintain  that  this  doc- 
trine, i.  e.  the  Eternal  Sonship,  is  neither 
affected  nor  changed  by  creation. 


OF    CHRIST.  29 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  principles  in  which  the  supporters  and  op- 
ponents of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eternal  Son- 
ship  may  or  ynay  not  agree. 

The  doctrine  connected  with  the  subject, 
in  which  both  classes  may  or  may  not  agree, 
is  that  the  three  persons  existing  in  the  God- 
head, exist  in  relation  or  in  related  states 
to  each  other;  and  that  these  related  states 
are  essential  in  the  Godhead,  and  eternal  as 
the  Godhead  itself.  We  have  already  re- 
marked, that  this  Essay  is  not  an  attempt  to 
prove,  from  Scripture,  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  and,  consequently,  belief  in  the  exis- 
tence of  the  three  persons  of  the  Godhead 
is  assumed  as  admitted.  All  who  believe  the 
doctrine  contended  for,  as  a  necessary  accom- 
paniment, believe  the  related  states  of  the 
divine  persons,  whilst  the  opponents  do  not 
necessarily  deny  this.  Both  opinions  are 
adopted  by  different  oppugners  of  the  Eternal 
Sonship;  and  most  of  them  do  affrm  that 
the  persons  of  the  Godhead  exist  in  related 
3* 


30  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

states.  In  this  part,  then,  of  our  examina- 
tion, we  have  to  expose  the  fallacy  of  those 
who,  denying  Christ's  Eternal  Sonship,  de- 
ny also  the  essentially  related  states  of  the 
Divine  persons.  As  a  more  correct  form  of 
expression,  we  shall,  for  the  most  part,  adopt 
the  term  related  state ^  instead  of  relation,  or 
relationship,  when  speaking  of  the  connexion 
subsisting  between  Divine  persons. 

As  it  is  admitted  that  there  are  three  per- 
sons in  the  Godhead,  these  three  must  exist, 
either  independently  of  each  other,  or  in  re- 
lated states.  If  they  exist  independently  of 
each  other,  they  are  then,  each,  an  indepen- 
dent person;  and,  if  each  be  an  independent 
person,  he  may  act  independently  and  sepa- 
rately from  the  rest;  consequently,  there  are 
three  independent  and  separate  Deities  ex- 
isting in  the  Divine  essence.  This  goes  to 
affirm  that  there  are  three  Gods,  and  intro- 
duces Polytheism.  The  persons  in  the  God- 
head do  not,  therefore,  exist  independently, 
but  in  related  states.  We  may  farther  re- 
mark, that  if  the  three  persons  exist,  inde- 
pendently of  each  other,  each,  as  a  Divine 
person,  must  possess  all  the  qualities  of  Deity 
inhering  in  himself;  consequently,  each,  in 
dependently  of  the  others,  possesses  self-ex- 


OF    CHRIST.  31 

istence,  eternity,  iiiimensity,  and  immutabi- 
lity. There  thus  would  be  tliree  self-exis- 
tences, eternities,  immensities,  and  immuta- 
bilities;— but  the  conclusions  are  so  absurd 
and  impossible,  that  it  is  needless  to  con- 
tinue. 

We  may  observe,  in  addition,  that  the  Di- 
vine essence,  being  simple,  indivisible,  and 
absolute,  cannot  be  multiplied.  Whatever 
persons  subsist  in  that  essence,  they  must 
be  natural  and  necessary  to  it ;  for  nothing 
can  begin  or  end  in  that  essence.  Its  nature 
and  perfections  are  immutable :  therefore, 
whatever  number  of  persons  exists  in  that  es- 
sence, the  persons  must  subsist  naturally  and 
necessarily,  and  must  each  possess  that  es- 
sence, which  is  indivisible.  In  consequence 
of  the  indivisibility  of  the  Divine  essence, 
related  states  must  be  naturally  and  necessa- 
rily constituted  between  the  Divine  persons 
existing  in  that  essence;  because  each  pos- 
sesses the  very  essence  and  perfections  which 
are  indivisible.  Seeing  there  are  related 
states  of  personality  essentially  existing  in 
the  Divine  essence,  we  have  to  ascertain 
whether  God  has  communicated  to  man  the 
actual  mode  of  these  states.  The  difference 
will  readily  be  perceived,  between  the  simple 


32  THE    ETERNAL    SON  SHIP 

announcement  of  the  fact,  that  there  are  re- 
lated states^  and  the  declaration  of  what  these 
states  are.  As  the  Deity  has  proclaimed  to 
man  the  essential  exstence  of  persons  in  the 
Godhead,  and,  as  we  have  shown,  that  these 
persons  must  exist  in  related  states,  and  not 
in  independence,  we  shall  now  endeavour  to 
prove  that  he  must  also  have  communicated 
to  man  the  mode  of  these  related  states,  viz. 
their  respective  designations,  and  the  consti- 
tuted related  states  indicated  by  these  desig- 
nations. God  is  the  supreme  Governor  of 
moral  intelligences;  and,  in  his  capacity  of 
Governor,  confers  benefits,  and  claims  duty 
from  his  moral  subjects.  In  order  to  enable 
them  to  ascertain  and  perform  their  duty,  he 
has  revealed  that  he  is;  but,  that  their  duty 
should  be  performed  aright,  he  has  declared 
the  qualities  inhering  in  his  nature ;  he  has 
revealed  his  self-existence,  eternity,  immen- 
sity, and  immutability, — his  omniscience  and 
omnipotence,  and  his  moral  attributes.  The 
simple  revelation  of  his  supremacy  and  go- 
vernment could  not  be  a  perfect  revelation, 
because  it  is  not  sufficient,  unless  accompa- 
nied with  the  announcement  of  the  Divine 
qualities,  to  convey  adequate  knowledge  of 
the  Being  who  required  the  homage  of  the 


OF   CHRIST.  33 

subjects;  otherwise,  the  homage  must  have 
been  tendered  to  an  "  Unknown  God."  But 
God  could  not  give  an  imperfect  revelation  of 
himself.  He  has,  therefore,  not  only  pro- 
claimed that  "  he  is,"  but  that,  amongst  his 
other  perfections  and  characters,  he  is  "  a  re- 
w^arder  of  all  those  who  diligently  seek  him." 
Man  could  not  have  rendered  proper  service, 
unless  this  declaration  had  been  made.  God, 
in  his  word,  demands  service  from  his  crea- 
tures, and  the  same  word  proclaims  his  na- 
ture, that  his  reasonable  creatures  may  know 
what  kind  of  service  is  required.  God  de- 
mands the  love  of  his  subjects;  but  love  is 
excited  and  continued  by  the  contemplation 
of  the  qualities  of  the  objects  which  it  ad- 
mires;— to  excite  and  continue  love  in  his 
subjects,  God  has  announced  his  qualities. 
He  exacts  obedience,  and  obedience  cannot 
be  paid  to  a  Being,  unless  the  attributes  of 
that  Being  are  announced.  God,  in  fine,  has 
revealed  his  existence  and  attributes, — there- 
fore, the  revelation  was  necessary.  But  God 
not  only  claims  worship  in  the  character  of 
moral  Governor,  but  especially  demands  wor- 
ship in  his  character  as  existing  in  related 
states;  John  v.  23:  "that  all  men  should 
honour  the  Son,  even  as  thev  honour  the  Fa- 


34  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

tlier.  He  that  honoureth  not  the  Son,  ho- 
noureth  not  the  Father  which  hath  sent  him." 
Hebrews  i.  6.  "  And  again,  when  he  bringeth 
in  the  first  begotten  into  the  world,  he  saith, 
And  let  all  the  angels  of  God  worship  him." 
These  passages  are  not,  at  present,  quoted  to 
shew  w^hat  these  related  states  are,  but  that 
God  has  demanded  worship  in  these  states. 
Created  intelligences,  then,  throughout  his 
universe,  are  commanded  to  pay  their  homage 
to  the  Godhead,  in  its  existence  in  related 
states.  But  how  can  that  homage  be  pre- 
sented, unless  the  mode  of  these,  states  be 
revealed?  "  For  who  hath  known  the  mind 
of  the  Lord?"  "  Whosoever  shall  call  upon 
the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved.  How 
then  shall  they  call  on  him  in  whom  they  have 
not  believed  ?  And  how  shall  they  believe  in 
him  of  whom  they  have  not  heard  ?"  To  be- 
lieve in  God,  as  regards  his  related  state,  to 
call  upon  him  in  that  capacity  in  which  ho- 
nour is  required  by  all  the  persons  in  the 
Godhead,  and  to  be  saved  by  him  as  the  God 
of  Salvation,  require  the  previous  knowledge 
of  his  mind,  and  of  what  his  related  states 
of  persons  are.  This  revelation,  then,  must 
be  given  in  the  inspired  Volume.  The  ho- 
mage, w  liich  God  demands,  must  be  ascribed 


OF    CHRIST.  So 

to  liim  in  his  eternal,  uncreated  existence,  as 
well  as  in  his  creating  and  redeeming  aspect 
to  man,  which  latter  is  contingent,  and  not 
necessarily  essential.  The  apostle  exclaims, 
"  Now  unto  the  King  eternal,  immortal,  in- 
visible, the  only  wise  God,  be  honour  and 
glory  for  ever  and  ever.  Amen."  Man  must 
therefore  present  "  honour  and  glory  to 
God,"  in  his  "  eternally,  immortally,"  re- 
lated states  of  persons.  Had  not  the  mode 
of  these  eternally  related  states  been  revealed, 
such  "  honour  and  glory"  could  not  have 
been  paid,  neither  could  God  have  exclaimed, 
when  his  creatures  failed  to  render  this  ser- 
vice :  "  If  I  be  a  Father,  where  is  mine  ho- 
nour ?  If  I  be  a  Master,  where  is  my  fear  ?" 
The  revelation  of  the  mode  of  the  eternally 
related  states  must,  therefore,  be  given  in  the 
word  of  God. 

There  are  only,  in  the  Scriptures,  two  sets 
of  designations  employed  to  describe  the 
Divine  persons,  which  can  be  conceived  to 
be  applicable  to  his  essentially  related  states. 
These  are  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit;  and  the  Father,  the  Word,  and  the 
Holy  Spirit,  We  do  not  select  these  terms, 
at  present,  from  any  particular  passage,  but 


o6  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

from  the  different  places,  at  large,  where  the 
persons  of  the  Godhead  are  mentioned. 

We  are  now  arrived  at  the  Third  division 
of  the  subject,  vi2;. 

Those  principles  which  are  maintain- 
ed BY  THE  supporters,  AND  DENIED  BY  THE 
OPPOSERS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE. 


OF    CHRIST. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


Cleaning  of  the  term  *o  P^oyo^^  The  Word. 

Having  discussed  all  the  preliminary  mat- 
ter, we  come  now  to  the  pith  of  the  contro- 
versy. In  consequence  of  an  alleged  contra- 
diction in  the  term  Son,  and  of  other  objec- 
tions, subsequently  to  be  mentioned,  those 
who  oppose  the  fact  of  a  revelation  having 
been  made  of  the  Eternal  Sonship,  and  yet 
maintain  that  there  are  related  states  in  the 
Deity,  affirm  that  the  only  related  state  es- 
sentially existing  in  the  Godhead,  which  is 
revealed  of  the  second  person,  is  that  of  The 
Word,  while  the  term  Son  designates  the  con- 
tingent relation  in  which  that  person  stood 
when  he  assumed  humanity.  We  shall  en- 
deavour to  prove  that  The  Word  is  not  the 
designation  applied  by  Scripture  to  the  se- 
cond person,  in  his  essentially  related  state 
in  the  Godhead;  and,  then,  endeavour  to  il- 
lustrate the  manner  in  which  that  term  is 
predicated  of  the  second  person  of  the  God- 
head. 
4 


38  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

Those  who  object  to  the  expression  Eter- 
nal Son,  on  account  of  its  presumed  contra- 
diction, and  adopt  the  expression  Eternal 
Word,  as  free  from  contradiction,  forget  that 
the  latter  conveys  no  conceivable  declaration 
of  the  related  states  of  the  ever-glorious  Per- 
son on  whom  it  is  conferred.  —  Tlie  very 
choice  of  the  latter  phrase,  by  the  opponeats 
of  the  Eternal  Sonship,  betrays  a  perversion 
of  fair  reasoning  and  just  conclusion.  In 
order  to  remedy  a  presumed  difficulty,  arising 
from  the  application  of  the  epithet  Eternal  to 
the  term  Son,  and  to  avoid  alleged  contradic- 
tion in  their  account  of  the  related  states  in 
the  Divine  persons,  they  involve  themselves 
in  the  greater  and  insuperable  difficulty  of 
choosing  a  term,  which  cannot,  by  any  im- 
plication, mean,  and  which  never  was  in- 
tended to  designate,  any  related  state  subsist- 
ing between  persons. 

The  Scriptures  are  written  in  Languages 
wherein  the  ideas  of  mankind  are  clothed  in 
corresponding  words.  Amongst  other  desig- 
nations of  the  second  person  of  the  Godhead 
is  that  of  'o  Aoj/of,  The  Word,  derived  from 
My  CO,  I  speak.  When  applied  to  any  person, 
there  must  be  some  connexion  between  the 
idea  involved  in  it  and  that  person.      This 


OF    CHRIST.  39 

must  readily  be  admitted.     But  the  question 
is,  does  it   apply  to   the    relation  subsisting 
between  two  persons  ?    Does  it  indicate  their 
related  state  ?    Can  it  be  applied  to  one  of 
these  persons ;    and  can  it  predicate  his  re- 
lated state  to  the  other?    Until  those  who 
reject  the  phrase  Eternal  Son  and  adopt  that 
of  Eternal  Word,  prove  these  positions,  (and 
on  them  the   onus  probandi — the  weight  of 
proving,  rests,)  the  assumption  of  this  term, 
in  the  signification   which  they  adopt,  is  a 
violation  of  all  just  principles  of  language, 
and  of  all  correct  and  determinate  forms  of 
expression.     The  presumed  inferiority,  which 
is  expressed  in  the  term  Son,  is  also  found, 
to  the  same  extent,  in  that  of  Word: — for 
speech  or  word,  according  to  our  ideas,   is 
uniformly  posterior  to  the  actual  existence  of 
"  the  person  who  employs  it.     But  the  grand 
objection  to  the  use  of  the  expression  The 
Word,  indicative  of  the  related  state  of  the 
second  person  in  the  Godhead,  is  found  in 
this  circumstance,  that  it  indicates  no  par- 
ticipation or  affiliation  of  nature.     It  is  only 
a   quality  inhering   in   the   nature,   and   not 
tlie  nature  itself.     The  universal  consent  of 
mankind  and   the  agreement  of  all   nations 
coalesce   in   this   definition    of    the   terra. — - 


40  THE    ETERNAL    SON  SHIP 

Predicated  of  any  person,  it  may  exhibit  the 
character  of  that  person,  in  that  particular 
aspect  to  which  the  quality  refers,  but  it  can 
never  denote  a  related  state  existing  betw  een 
him  and  another.  There  is  internal  proof, 
that  the  inspired  Volume  no  where  indicates, 
that  the  term,  The  Word,  expresses  a  related 
state.  It  is  not  joined  with  any  other  desig- 
nation expressive  of  a  relation.  We  need  not 
enter  into  the  long  discussion  concerning  the 
genuineness  of  1  John  v.  7.  We  have  only 
to  refer  to  the  controversy,  between  Professor 
Person  and  Arch-deacon  Travis,  which  is 
now  almost  universally  allowed  to  have  proved 
that  the  verse  in  question  is  an  interpolation. 
This  verse,  then,  being  expunged,  there  only 
remain  John  i.  1: — 14.  and  Rev.  xix.  13. 
where  the  term  more  immediately  denotes  a 
person.  In  none  of  these  passages  does  its 
use  refer  to  another  person  existing  in  rela- 
tion with  the  person  who  is  denominated 
The  Word.  On  the  contrary,  when,  in  the 
first  of  these  texts,  the  ineffable  glory  of  this 
person  is  described,  the  sacred  writer,  to  de- 
lineate its  effulgency,  refers  to  another  cha- 
racter which  The  Word  possessed — a  charac- 
ter more  expressive  of  his  excellent  glory,  and 
denoting  his  related  state,  which  The  Word 


tJF    CHRIST.  41 

(lid  not.  The  writer  says,  '^  And  we  beheld 
his  glory, '^'^  viz.  the  glory  of  The  Word  ;  he 
then  wishes  to  convey  a  notion  of  that  glory, 
to  effect  which,  he  suddenly  breaks  off  to 
another  description,  involving  other  ideas,  viz. 
those  of  a  related  state ;  "  this  glory^''  he 
says,  was  "  the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten 
of  the  Father, '^'^  John,  then,  (verses  15 — 18.) 
bears  witness  of  this  person  who  was  The 
Word,  who  had  glory  as  "  The  Word,"  and 
"  as  of  the  only  Begotten  of  the  Father." 
He  expressly  declares  that  he  is  "  the  only 
begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Father."  The  tenor  of  these  verses  is  im- 
pressively forcible.  John  endeavours  to  por- 
tray the  eternal  existence  of  The  Word,  and 
his  external  procedure  in  creation.  He  en- 
deavours to  describe  the  glory  of  The  Word, 
but  failing  to  exhibit  it  clearly,  in  that  cha- 
racter, to  the  intellects  of  men,  he  directly 
refers  to  the  state  in  which  The  Word  was, 
for  a  display  of  his  glory,  viz.  his  related  state 
"  as  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father."  In 
the  subsequent  part  of  his  work,  the  Evange- 
list ceases  to  mention  this  person  under  his 
denomination  of  The  Word,  and  continues  to 
designate  him  by  other  expressions,  generally 
indicative  of  his  related  state.  In  the  xix 
4* 


42  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

chap,  of  the  Apocalypse,  v.  13.  the  trium- 
phant rider  is  usually  understood  to  be  the 
Messiah  as  the  Mediator,  and,  from  the  im- 
port of  the  context,  the  application  of  the 
phrase  "  Word  of  God,"  is  expressive  of  his 
character  as  Conqueror,  and  not  of  a  related 
state  in  which  he  exists.  In  fact,  in  this  de- 
scription, The  Word  is  applied  to  him  in  his 
contingent  character  of  Mediator,  not  in  his 
eternally  related  state ;  and,  in  consequence, 
it  does  not  here  denote  his  absolute  eternity 
in  the  Godhead.* 

Having  thus  shown  that  the  term  The 
Word,  cannot  apply  to  the  related  state  of 
the  second  person  in  the  Godhead,  we  shall 
now  illustrate  the  manner  in  which  it  is  ap- 
plied to  that  person. 

As  words  are  representatives  of  qualities 
of,  and  ideas  in,  the  mind,  and,  as  The  Word, 
when  predicated  of  this  person,  must  exhibit 
him  in  some  character,  the  character  indi- 
cated by  this  expression  is  that  of  the  abso- 
lute Divinity  of  the  person  described,  when 
he  especially  acts  as  the  essential  representa- 
tive of  the  Divine  perfections  and  counsels, 

*  For  an  illustration  of  the  epithets  in  the  Apocalypse,  see 
the  Letter  of  Dr.  E.  D.  Clarke,  in  Walpole's  Travels  in  the  East-. 
—London,  1820. 


OF    CHRIST.  43 

and,  ill  liis  mediatorial  office,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Divine  will  concerning '  the 
church,  and  the  glorious  plan  of  redemption 
and  salvation. 

In  farther  illustration  of  the  subject,  we 
shall  attempt  to  prove  the  Sonship  of  the  se- 
cond person  in  the  Godhead,  from  the  quali- 
ties describing  him,  and  from  the  different 
expressions  of  Scripture  concerning  him.  We 
shall  endeavour  to  answer  the  objections  used 
against  the  term  Son,  mid  Eternal  Son,  and 
the  objections  urged  against  the  Eternal  Son- 
ship,  in  consequence  of  alleged  contradic- 
tions. 


44  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 


CHAPTER  V. 


Observations  on  terms  expressing  Related 
States — Proof  of  the  Eternal  Sonship^from 
the  qualities  describing  the  Second  Person 
in  the  Godhead,  and  from  the  different  ex- 
pressions of  Scripture  respecting  him. 

We  have  already  shown,  that,  if  there  are 
three  persons  eternally  in  the  Godhead,  these 
persons  must  exist  in  related  states, — that  the 
mode  of  these  eternally  related  states  must 
be  revealed  to  man  in  Scripture, — that  there 
are,  in  the  Bible,  only  two  sets  of  designa- 
tions, viz.  the  Father,  the  Word,  and  the 
Holy  Spirit — and  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Spirit,  which  have  been  considered 
as  revealing  the  mode  of  these  eternally  re- 
lated states ;  and  that  one  of  these  sets,  viz. 
where  the  term  The  Word  is  employed,  does 
not  contain  any  designation  of  the  eternally 
related  states  of  the  second  person  in  the 
Godhead — consequently,  the  term  Son,  must 
be  the  designation  of  that  person. 


OF    CHRIST.  45 

In  consequence  of  the  nature,  at  present, 
necessarily  inhering  in  man,  he  is  restricted 
in  the  range  of  his  intellect,  especially  when 
employed  in  examining  pure  spirit.  Habi- 
tuated to  objects  of  sense,  from  which  he 
obtains  all  his  notions  of  individuality,  he 
cannot  separate  these  sensible  objects  from 
his  notions  of  person  or  character.  To  he  is 
more  or  less  assimilated,  in  his  reflections, 
with  the  things  in  contact  with  his  senses. 
Hence  there  is  no  existence  of  person  or  in- 
dividual, singularly  or  relatively,  however 
different  from  matter,  whose  epithet  is  not 
originally  deduced  from  material  objects,  ex- 
cept the  predication  of  simple  being  itself. 
The  underived  notion  of  being  is  inherent 
in  the  mind.  It  is  the  foundation  of  all 
knowledge  and  reasoning.  It  cannot  be 
traced  to  any  combination  of  sensible  ob- 
jects, because  it  is  the  origin  from  which  all 
combinations  are  derived  ;  it  cannot  be  de- 
rived, because  it  is  the  source  of  all  deriva- 
tions. It  cannot  be  deduced  from  any  mode 
or  form  of  being,  because  it  is  simultaneous 
with  being,  and  all  its  modes  and  forms.  It 
cannot  be  defined,  either  by  analysis  or  syn- 
thesis, because  it  is  previous  to  analysis  and 
synthesis.    The  term  r\yrv  Jehovah.,  in  Hebrew, 


46  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHiP 

and  *o  m  he  who  is,  in  Greek,  are  of  the  de- 
scription which  predicate  simple  being.  The 
intellect  of  man,  when  endeavouring  to  grasp 
the  nature  or  essence  in  which  being  inheres, 
is  unable  to  analyze  the  distinction,  or  to 
compound,  in  definite  precision,  the  union  of 
being  and  essence.  Yet,  the  two  are  insepa- 
rably engrafted  in  our  thoughts,  in  the  same 
notion,  and  the  apprehension  of  this  union  of 
being  and  of  essence,  in  which  being  is,  is 
the  abstract  method  by  which  man  endea- 
vours to  disentangle  his  mental  powers  from 
the  contemplation  of  material  objects.  In  all 
applications  of  the  abstract  notion  of  being 
to  surroundhig  objects,  we  uniformly  involve 
it  with  materiality,  not  because  these  col- 
lateral ideas  are  necessarily  connected,  but 
because  they  have  always  been  simultaneous 
in  our  minds.  The  mind  fixes  on  the  exter- 
nal object  tangible  by  the  senses,  and  iden- 
tifies the  external  appearance,  with  the  pre- 
dication of  being  proposed  to  it.  When  the 
prolongation  of  being,  as  it  is  known  amongst 
the  race  of  men,  is  announced,  the  mind 
iHStantly  fixes  on  the  objects  that  are  pro- 
longed, and  that  are  externally  visible, — 
associates  them  with  those  that  preceded, 
and    by  this  association,    establishes  a  rela- 


OF    CHRIST.  47 

tion  ill  the  manner  of  thinking  concerning 
the  objects,  as  well  as  between  the  objects 
themselves  which  are  contemplated.  By  this 
process,  the  mind  apprehends  the  relation 
which  was  really  true  in  itself,  before  it  was 
thus  ascertained.  In  the  Greek,  the  most  re- 
fined and  correctly  expressive  of  the  ancient 
languages,  the  prolonged  object  is  termed 
'vto^  So7i,  derived  from  the  infinitive  vn  of  the 
Hebrew  verb  n-n  he  ivas,  the  origin  of  r\)r\' 
Jehovah,  the  name  of  God  expressing  his 
self-existence.  The  Saxons  express  both 
the  luminary  of  day  and  the  prolonged  ob- 
ject of  being  by  the  same  designation.  These 
are  similarly  spelt  in  the  Saxon-English — 
Sonne.  Our  Saxon  Ancestors  assimilated  the 
reflection  of  the  likeness  in  the  prolonged 
object  derived  from  him  who  preceded  him, 
witli  the  reflection  of  the  light  which  the 
material  world  derives  from  the  luminary  of 
day.  The  only  underived  term,  in  our  no- 
tions, viz.  that  indicative  of  being,  is  employ- 
ed by  the  Deity  to  represent  himself,  and  to 
indicate  his  being,  and  his  continuity  of 
being.  In  the  present  stage  of  intellect, 
there  cannot  be  employed  words  or  repre- 
sentative signs  to  indicate  his  mode  or  modes 
of  being,  unless  derivative  from,  and  collate- 


48  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIl^ 

ral  with,  those  words  and  representative  signs 
which  are  predicated  of  material  objects ;  be- 
cause all  modifications  of  beingf  are  relative. 
They  are  relative,  either  with  respect  to 
simple  being  itself,  or  with  respect  to  them- 
selves. But  all  the  relative  notions  which 
man  possesses  are  derived  from  material  ob- 
jects. Every  term,  then,  indicative  of  the 
modifications  of  being,  must  be  one  deduced 
from  sensible  likenesses.  Whatever  terms 
are  employed,  therefore,  to  delineate  the 
related  states  in  the  Godhead,  must  partake 
of  this  allusion  to  the  material  world,  and  of 
the  usage  of  this  allusion  adopted  in  lan- 
guage. The  Godhead  is  expressed  by  the 
only  simple,  underived  notion  which  language 
possesses:  within  the  Godhead  there  are  re- 
lated states:  man  has  no  pure  underived 
words  to  express  related  states,  because  his 
knowledge  of  such  states  is  primarily  derived 
from  external  nature.  The  revelation  of 
these  states  must,  then,  be  clothed  in  mate- 
rially derivative  designations,  which  are  not 
strictly  applicable  to  the  spiritually  related 
states  of  the  Godhead,  and  involve  an  ap- 
parent difficulty  or  contradiction,  on  account 
of  the  transference  of  mutually  acquired 
epithets  and  notions  to  the  uncreated,  pure, 


OF    CHRIST.  49 

and  eternal  Mind.  But  the  apparent  diffi- 
culty or  contradiction  is  increased,  in  our  re- 
flection upon  it,  when  qualities  are  ascribed 
to  such  related  states  designated  by  those 
terms  which  are  necessarily  employed.  The 
qualities  of  pure  bein^,  in  the  essence  of  the 
Godhead,  applied  or  transferred  to  the  re- 
lated states  in  the  Godhead,  must  necessarily 
produce  a  seeming  discordance,  because  they 
are,  in  one  case,  attributed  to  that  which  has 
no  material  derivation  in  our  notions,  and, 
in  the  other,  to  related  states  ;  the  knowledge 
of  the  modes  of  which,  and  their  designa- 
tions, are  necessarily  derived,  and  insepara- 
ble from,  our  material  associations.  From 
the  constitution  of  the  human  soul,  any  re- 
lated state  or  characteristic  procedure  of  the 
Godhead,  invested  with  the  qualities  of  self- 
existence,  eternity,  immensity,  and  immuta- 
bility, must  involve,  when  traced  to  our 
original  acquirement  and  present  definition, 
an  association  of  qualities  belonging  to  pure 
being,  united  with  notions  derived  from  ma- 
terial appearances.  Whatever  term,  then, 
God  has  employed  to  announce  his  related 
state,  it  must,  in  our  apprehension,  be  accom- 
panied with  this  association,  arising,  and  in- 
separable from,  our  limited  understanding. 
S 


50  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

Yet,  there  will  be  found  sufficient  precision  to 
enable  us  to  combine  the  designations  em- 
ployed, with  the  related  states  which  they 
specify.  Terms,  expressive  of  relation,  im- 
ply a  similarity  of  nature,  a  comparison  and 
the  possession  of  qualities,  which  enable  the 
comparison  to  be  instituted.  The  expression 
'o  Koya?^  The  Word,  which  we  have  already 
considered,  contains  none  of  the  essentials  of 
a  related  term. — For  these,  and  other  reasons, 
we  have  rejected  it  as  expressive  of  a  related 
state,  and  given  it  its  proper  meaning. 

In  accordance  with  the  preceding  obser- 
vations on  the  language  employed  to  deno- 
minate related  states,  we  shall  now  examine 
the  term,  *o  '\jiq?,  The  Son.  The  related  states 
in  the  Godhead  are  thus  designated  in  Mat- 
thew, xxviii.  19.  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach 
all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father^,  and  of  the  Son,'  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.^^  We  have  evinced,  that  whatever 
designation  is  applied  to  the  second  person  in 
the  Godhead,  illustrative  of  his  related  state, 
must  be  derived  from,  and  associated  with, 
sensible  objects,  and  that,  when  qualities  are 
ascribed  to  this  divinely  related  state,  they 
must  be  transferred,  from  their  application  to 
pure  being,  to  their  designation  originally  de- 


OF    CHRIST.  51 

rived  by  us  from  external  objects  and  their 
relations.     There   is   no   term   of  a  related 
state,  of  which  any  natural  perfection  of  the 
Deity  can  be  predicated,  that  is  not  liable  to 
this  sort  of  objection,  which  is  as  applicable 
to  the  expression,  the  Eternal  Word,  as  to 
that  of  the  Eternal  Son.     Investigate  all  the 
stores   of  language,    examine  all   the   terms 
used  on  earth,  and,  it  will  be  found,  that  they 
must,  and  do,  partake  of  this  objection.     If 
there  be  any  force  in  it,  man  should  object 
to  the  nature  of  his  presently  constituted  in- 
tellect, which  will  not  contribute  notions  and 
terms  that  are   alone  congenial  to  pure  un- 
alloyed spirit.     To  commence  the  argument 
with   the   sweeping   announcement  that  the 
phrase  Eternal  Son  is  nonsense, — is  a  prepos- 
terous violation   of  all  just   reasoning,   and 
argues  a  monstrous  want   of  knowledge  of 
the  source  from  which  are  derived   all  our 
notions  of  individuality  and  of  related  states. 
When  the  opponents  have,  by  fair  and  vigo- 
rous reasoning,  shown  the  absurdity  of  our 
assertion,   let  them  adopt  the  conclusion  that 
it  is  nonsense.     But,  to  assume,  as  the  pre- 
mises, the  very  point  in  question, — to  settle 
the  controversy  by  a  dogmatical,  ex  cathedra 
sentence,  without  a  single  step  of  of  reason- 


62  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

ing, — is  the  argumentation  of  a  child,   and 
not  of  a  philosopher. 

We  may  observe,  that  the  second  person 
in  the  Godhead  has  different  epithets, — some 
of  them  derived  from  his  aspect  within  the 
Godhead,  and  some  from  his  aspect  towards 
man.  He  is  termed  the  Son  of  God,  signifi- 
cant of  his  eternally  related  state  in  the  God- 
head; the  Word,  significant  of  his  absolute 
Divinity,  and  of  his  being  the  representa- 
tive of  the  Divine  Perfections,  Counsels,  and 
Will.  In  his  aspect  towards  man,  he  is 
called  Messiah  or  Christ,  the  Anointed ;  Je- 
sus, the  Saviour ;  Son  of  Man,  possessing  the 
human  nature ;  the  Lord,  moral  Governor, 
in  his  judicial  rectitude  and  beneficent  kind- 
ness. 

Let  the  reader  avoid  confounding  our  Lord's 
human  nature  with  his  personality. — He  is 
a  Divine  person  ;  he  possesses  the  Divine 
nature  as  a  Divine  person ;  he  assumed  hu- 
man nature,  which  never  had  personality  of 
itself, — otherwise,  Christ  would  have  been 
two  persons — an  impossibility. 

The  following  remarks,  which  are  the  sen- 
timents of  Dr.  Owen,  will  assist  us  in  making 
the  requisite  discrimination. 


OF   CHRIST. 


63 


Sometimes  that  which  is  announced  con- 
cerning the  person  of  Christ,  is  verified  or 
true  only  in  one  of  his  natures.  "  The  Word 
was  with  God,  and  The  Word  was  God."— 
"  Before  Abraham  was,  I  am."—''  Upholding 
all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power."  These 
expressions  are  referable  to  Christ,  and  are 
true  only  of  the  Divine  nature.  "  To  us  a 
child  is  born,"  &c.  This  is  true  only  of  his 
human  nature. 

Sometimes  that  which  is  spoken  of  the 
person  belongs  not  distinctly  and  originally 
to  either  nature,  but  belongs  to  his  person,  on 
account  of  the  union  of  both  natures.  These 
are  the  most  direct  enunciations  concerning 
his  Person— such  as  Prophet,  Priest,  King, 
&c. 

Sometimes  his  person  is  denominated  by 
one  of  his  natures,  when  the  acts  of  the  other 
are  assigned  to  him.  Example  :  "  They  cru- 
cified the  Lord  of  Glory."  He  is  the  "  Lord 
of  Glory"  in  his  Divine  nature  only;  and, 
from  this,  his  person  is  denominated.  So 
"  He  (God)  purchased  the  Church  with  his 
own  blood."  "  The  Son  of  Man,  who  is  in 
heaven."  He  is  God  only  in  his  Divine  na- 
ture ;  he  is  Son  of  Man  only  in  his  human 
nature. 


o4  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

Sometimes  the  person  is  denominated  from 
one  nature ;  and  that  which  is  ascribed  to  it, 
is  common  to  both  natures.  Thus,  "  of  whom, 
as  concerning  the  flesh,  Christ  came,  who  is 
over  all,  God  blessed  for  ever.     Amen." 

Sometimes  the  person  is  denominated  from 
both  natures ;  and  that  which  is  proper  to 
one  alone,  is  ascribed  to  him.  "  What  think 
ye  of  Christ  ?  whose  son  is  he  ?  They  say 
unto  him,  The  Son  of  David." 

We  prove  that  his  designation  of  Son  is 
expressive  of  his  eternally  related  state,  from 
the  qualities  ascribed  to  him  as  Son  ; — Eter- 
nity is  ascribed  to  him  as  Son. 

The  Spirit,  the  third  person  in  the  God- 
head, is  admitted,  by  all  sides,  to  be  eternal 
He  is  expressly  declared  to  be  so  in  Scripture. 
Hebrews  ix.  14.  ''  How  much  more  shall  the 
blood  of  Christ,  who,  through  the  Eternal  Spi- 
rit, offered  himself  ivithout  spot  to  God,  purge 
your  conscience  from  dead  tvorks,  to  serve  the 
living  GodP^  But  this  same  Spirit,  this 
Eternal  Spirit,  is  the  Spirit  of  the  Father. 
Romans  viii.  11.  ^'  But  if  the  Spirit  ofhiin  that 
raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead  divell  in  you ; 
he  that  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead  shall 
also  quicken  your  mortal  bodies,  by  his  Spirit 
tlmt  dwelleth  in  you."^^    Galatians  i.  1.  "  Paul 


OF    CHRIST.  OO 

an  apostle,  (not  of  men,  neither  by  man,  hut  by 
Jesus  Christ,  and  God  the  Father,  who  raised 
him  from  the  dead,^'')  This  Eternal  Spirit  is 
declared  to  be  the  Spirit  of  the  Son.  Gala- 
tians  iv.  6.  "  And,  because  ye  are  sons,  God 
hath  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your 
hearts,  crying,  Abba,  Father,''^  Being,  then, 
the  Spirit  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son,  these 
latter  persons  must  possess  the  same  qualities 
as  those  which  inhere  in  the  Spirit.  The 
Spirit  is  denominated  Eternal ;  consequently, 
the  Father  and  the  Son  are  Eternal.  These 
terms  indicate  related  states,  which  are  thus 
Eternal.  Script,  .e,  then,  has  proclaimed  the 
Eternity  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit. 
If  they  possess  Eternity,  they  must  also  pos- 
sess all  the  collateral  qualities  of  Godhead,  viz. 
self-existence,  immensity,  immutability,  om- 
niscience, omnipotence,  and  the  moral  attri- 
butes. If  the  Spirit,  for  instance,  be  immense, 
which  he  must  be,  as  he  is  Eternal,  the  Fa- 
ther and  the  Son  are  also  immense ;  for  the 
Spirit  is  the  Spirit  of  the  Father,  and  he  is 
the  Spirit  of  the  Son  :  the  qualities,  therefore, 
which  inhere  in  him,  inhere  in  the  Father  and 
in  the  Son.  The  Son  of  God  is,  therefore, 
as  Son,  immense. — The  same  may  be  shown 
of  all  the  attributes  of  Deity.     The  Son  pos- 


56  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

sesses,  in  himself,  all  the  effulgent  and  ineffa- 
ble perfections  of  Godhead,  independently  of 
creation,  providence,  and  redemption  ;  he  had 
this  "■  glory  with  the  Father  before  the  world 
was."  Though  nature,  animate  and  inani- 
mate, were  swept  from  being,  he  must  retain 
this  glory.  No  contingent  displays  of  power 
or  goodness  can  increase  or  diminish  it.  Last- 
ing as  his  Godhead,  no  revolution  in  creation 
can  affect  it.  Though  he  had  neither  assumed 
humanity,  nor  received  the  revenue  of  re- 
deeming glory,  this  unutterable  glory,  in  the 
vastness  of  his  Eternity,  must  have  been  his 
"  who  inhabiteth  the  depths  i..  Eternity."  The 
proclamation  to  the  intelligences  of  heaven  is, 
"  Let  all  the  Angels  of  God  worship  him ;" 
and  the  command  to  men  is  to  honour  and 
worship  him.  Sonship  is  ascribed  to  Christ 
as  his  related  state  in  the  Divine  Essence. 

The  different  repetitions  of  the  voice  from 
heaven,  prochiiming  our  Lord  to  be  the  Son, 
are  acknowledged  to  be  the  voice  of  God,  in 
the  person  of  the  Father.  Matthew  iii.  17.; 
xvii.  5.  Mark  i.  IL ;  ix.  7.  Luke  iii.  22. ;  ix. 35. 
John  i.  32 — 34.  "  This  is  my  beloved  So7i,  in 
whom  I  am  icell  pleasecV^  "  Thou  art  my  be- 
loved Son,  in  whom  lam  well  pleased. '^'^  "  This 
is  my  beloved  Son ;  hearhim.^^  "  Thou  art  my 


OF    CHRIST.  57 

beloved  Son,  in  thee  lam  well pleased.^^  Was 
it  our  Lord's  human  nature  that  God  the 
Father  proclaimed  to  be  his  Son,  with  whom 
he  \ras  well  pleased?  Surely  not:  because 
our  Lord's  human  nature  never  had  subsis- 
tence by  itself,  ft  could  not,  therefore,  be 
with  this,  simply  considered. — With  what, 
then,  ^\  as  it  ?  Certainly,  with  the  Divine 
person,  in  its  union  with  the  human  nature, 
and  with  all  the  acts  performed  by  that  Di- 
vine person,  in  union  with  the  assumed  hu- 
man nature; — and  if  so,  this  Divine  person 
is,  properly  speaking,  the  Son  of  God.  This 
Divine  person  retained,  and  could  not  but  re- 
tain, his  related  state  of  Son  to  the  Father  or 
first  person,  after  he  had  assumed  the  human 
nature  into  personal  union  with  his  Divine. 
Consequently,  the  Divine  nature  of  Christ 
subsisted  in  the  related  state  of  Son,  in  the 
Godhead,  before  he  assumed  the  human  na- 
ture into  union  with  himself.  God,  in  the 
person  of  the  Father,  was,  therefore,  eternally 
well  pleased  with  God  in  the  person  of  the 
Son. — From  these  facts,  we  deduce  the  con- 
clusion that  the  Sonship  of  Christ  is  eternal. 

It  may  be  objected,  by  an  opponent  of  the 
doctrine  which  we  maintain,  that  it  is  neither 
the  Divine  nature  in  personality,  nor  the  hu- 


58  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

man  nature  without  personality,  that  is  the 
proclaimed  Son  of  God, — but  that  it  is  both 
in  union.  We  answer,  that  if  the  Divine  na- 
ture of  our  Lord  necessarily  possess  person- 
ality in  itself; — if  it  were  the  same  in  itself, 
before  it  assumed  the  human  nature  into 
union,  that  it  was  after  that  assumption  ;-r- 
and,  if  it  would  necessarily  have  continued 
the  same,  though  no  such  assumption  had 
ever  taken  place,— -the  assumption  of  his  hu- 
man nature  into  union  with  itself  could  have 
made  no  alteration  or  change  in  the  Divine 
nature  or  persons ;  therefore,  though  the  enun- 
ciation of  Son  be  predicated  of  our  Lord  in 
human  nature,  that  predication  is  true  only  of 
his  Divine  nature  and  person.  If  men  be 
sometimes  called  sons  of  God,  they  have  hu- 
man personality ;  and,  there  was  a  time  when 
they  were  not  the  sons  of  God ;— -but  the  hu- 
man nature  of  our  Lord  never  had  person- 
ality of  itself.  If  our  Lord  be  called  the  Son 
of  God,  he  can  only  be  so,  in  that  nature, 
which  possessed  Sonship,  in  the  proper  sense 
of  the  term.  It  must,  therefore,  be,  with  re- 
spect to  his  Divine  nature,  that  he  was,  and 
is,  the  Son  of  God.  That  nature  was,  of  it- 
self, capable  of  personality:  of  this  his  hu- 
man nature  never  was,  and  never  could  be 


OF    CHRIST.  6y 

capable.  Hence,  our  Lord  is  the  Son  of  God, 
with  respect  to  his  Divine  nature,  which 
alone  was  capable  of  Sonship.  Our  Lord, 
therefore,  with  respect  to  his  Divine  na- 
ture, ever  was,  and  ever  will  be,  the  Son  of 
God. 

In  the  different  proclamations  of  Christ's 
Sonship,  the  Holy  Spirit,  on  one  occasion, 
like  a  Dove, — on  another,  like  a  white  cloud, 
accompanied  the  voice  from  heaven.  Though, 
at  these  times,  our  Lord's  bodily  appearance 
was  that  of  a  man,  yet  his  personality  was 
that  of  the  Son  of  God.  The  voice  from 
heaven  concerned  the  person  addressed,  not 
the  appearance  with  which  he  was  invested. 

In  order  to  consider,  aright,  the  differ- 
ent voices  of  the  Father,  proclaiming  the 
Son  to  the  church  and  the  world,  we  refer 
to  Matthew  xi.  27.  *' AH  things  are  deliver- 
ed unto  me  of  my  Father :  and  no  man 
knoweth  the  Son,  but  the  Father :  neither 
knoweth  any  man  the  Father,  save  the  Son, 
and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal 
him." 

When  the  proclamations  were  made,  our 
Lord  was  either  about  to  commence  his  pub- 
lic ministry  or  engaged  in  its  most  important 
transactions.     It  was  necessary  that  the  Fa- 


y. 


60  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

ther  should  make  such  a  declaration  con- 
cerning the  Son ;  for,  whatever  other  views 
men  might  have  entertained  concerning  the 
Saviour,  in  his  work  of  Redemption,  they 
could  not  have  known  that,  though  invested 
with  our  nature,  he  was  the  Son  of  God. 

All  the  three  Evangelists,  who  record  our 
Lord's  Baptism,  say  that  the  heaven  was 
opened,  the  Holy  Spirit  descended,  and  the 
voice  of  God,  in  the  person  of  the  Father, 
was  heard.  John,  testifying  the  fact  from 
what  he  heard  and  saw,  bears  record  of  Christ, 
that  "this  is  the  Son  of  God."  "He  was," 
says  John,  "before  me;"  even  this  person, 
of  whom  he  bears  record,  that  he  is  the  Son 
of  God.  But  John  was  before  Christ  in 
priority  of  time,  in  human  nature.  He, 
therefore,  announces  the  existence  of  the  re- 
lated state  of  the  Son,  before  the  assumption 
of  Christ's  humanity. 

In  the  circumstances  attending  Christ's 
Baptism,  we  perceive  that  the  three  blessed 
persons  in  the  glorious  Godhead  revealed  the 
eternally  related  state  in  which  they  stand 
to  one  another,  as  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit,  each  represented  by  a  particular  sym- 
bol. The  Father  was  represented  by  the 
voice ;  the  Son  by  his  human  nature ;  and  the 


or   CHRIST.  61 

Spirit  by  the  Dove.  It  will  not  be  asserted 
that  the  voice  was  a  person  ;  it  was  only  the 
symbol  of  a  person,  and  that  person  was  the 
first  or  the  Father.  It  will  not  be  affirmed 
that  the  Dove  was  a  person ;  it  was  only  the 
symbol  of  a  person  ;  and  that  person  was  the 
third  or  Holy  Spirit.  Neither  can  it  be  said 
that  tlie  human  nature  of  our  Lord  was  a 
person  ;  it  was  only  the  symbol  of  a  person; 
and  that  person  was  the  second  or  Son. 

Those  who  maintain  that  the  proclamation 
of  the  Father  refers  to  our  Lord's  human  na- 
ture only,  confound  the  symbol  with  what 
is  represented  by  it.  To  say  that  the  voice 
addressed  the  human  and  Divine  natures  in 
union,  as  Son,  is  to  confound  the  relation  of 
these  natures  to  the  Father,  and  to  represent 
each  as  possessing  the  same  related  state  to 
the  Father,  which  is  absurd.  Nothing,  there- 
fore, could  have  been  addressed,  except  our 
Lord's  Divine  nature. 

Our  Lord  was  declared  Son  by  the  angel 
Gabriel.  Luke  i.  31 — 35,  ''  And  the  angel 
answered  and  said  unto  her,  The  Holy  Ghost 
shall  come  upon  thee,  and  the  poxoer  of  the 
Highest  shall  overshadow  thee  :  therefore  also 
that  Iwly  thing  ivhich  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall 
be  called  the  Son  of  God.''''  A  slight  con- 
6 


62  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

sideration  of  this  passage  will  lead  the  reader 
to  perceive  that  the  three  persons  of  the  God- 
head are  distinctly  mentioned  to  Mary  by 
the  angel.  The  Holy  Ghost  is  obviously 
mentioned  as  a  person.  The  Highest  refers 
to  the  person  of  the  Father :  and  the  Son  of 
God  is  expressly  named ; — '*  that  holy  thing 
which  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall  be  called 
the  Son  of  God."  Now,  was  not  our  Lord 
as  much  God  and  man  in  the  womb,  and 
when  he  was  born,  as  he  is  Tioic  ?  From  the 
moment  that  he  assumed  our  nature,  he  was 
as  really  God  and  man,  as  he  is  at  the  present 
period.  That  which  is  the  subject  of  the  an- 
gel's announcement  is  the  Son, — a  Son  with 
proper  personality.  But  our  Lord's  human 
nature  never  had  personality  of  its  own. 
From  the  moment  of  its  assumption  into  union 
with  the  Divine  nature,  it  subsisted  in  Divine 
personality.  The  angel  says,  that  "  the  holy 
thing  which  should  be  born,  should  be  called 
the  Son  of  God."  Our  Lord,  therefore,  was 
the  Son  of  God,  with  respect  to  his  Divine 
personality,  and  not  with  respect  to  his  hu- 
man nature.  He  was  surely  to  be  called  Son 
of  God,  with  respect  to  that  nature  and  that 
peronality  which  were  capable  of  Divine 
Sonship.     It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  it  was 


I 


OF    CHRIST.  bo 

in  our  Lord's  Divine  nature  and  personality 
that  the  ano-el  meant  that  our  Lord  should 
be  called  the  Son  of  God,  because  his  human 
nature  never  had  personality  of  its  own. 

The  difference  of  name  which  the  angel 
ascribes  to  our  Lord  is  striking,  and  evidently 
denotes  a  distinction  in  the  application  of 
the  terms  Jesus  and  Son  of  God;  the  one 
being  referable  to  his  human,  ^nd  the  other 
to  his  Divine  nature.  The  angel  first  an- 
nounces our  Lord's  humanity,  as  it  was  the 
object  Avhich  the  senses  of  men  beheld,  and 
which,  consequently,  was  the  prior  impres- 
sion on  the  mind,  when  men  either  visually 
perceived,  or  mentally  apprehended,  the  per- 
son of  our  Lord.  "  And  behold,  thou  shcdt 
conceive  in  thy  womb,  and  bring  forth  a  So7i, 
and  shalt  call  his  name  Jesiis.^^  The  angel 
alludes  to  the  compound  person  of  our  Lord, 
as  Messiah,  composed  of  his  Divine  and  hu- 
man natures,  or  the  manhood  existing  in 
union  with  the  Divinity.  It  is  obvious  that, 
in  this  case,  whatever  actions  are  ascribed  to 
this  compound  person,  they  must  be  the  ac- 
tions of  the  Godhead,  operating  through  the 
medium  of  the  assumed  humanity.  The  epi- 
thets descriptive  of  the  person,  either  in  his 
existence   before  these  actions  occurred,   or 


64  THE    tTERNAL    SONSHIP 

after  their  performance,  must,  in  conse- 
quence, really  belong  to  the  actual  agent, 
which  is  the  Divine  nature.  This  Divine  na- 
ture, however,  in  our  apprehension  of  our 
Lord  as  Messiah,  can  never  be  abstracted 
from  the  bodily  tabernacle  through  which  his 
Divinity  acted.  Consequently,  it  is  said  of 
this  Divinity,  "  He  shall  he  greats  and  shall 
he  called  the  'Son  of  the  Highest:  and  the 
Lord  God  shall  give  unto  him  the  throne  of 
his  Father  David:  and  he  shall  reign  over 
the  house  of  Jacohfor  ever;  and  of  his  king- 
dom there  shall  he  no  end.^^ 

Such  were  the  triumphs  which  were  to 
grace,  and  the  achievements  which  were  to 
illustrate,  the  Messiah.  His  greatness  and 
his  state  of  "  Son  of  the  Highest,"  are  indi- 
cative of  his  Divinity ; — his  being  the  Son  of 
David,  whose  typical  throne  he  was  to  ob- 
tain, indicates  his  humanity  ; — his  reign  over 
the  house  of  Jacob,  and  his  eternal  kingdom, 
point  out  the  union  of  his  Divinity  and  hu- 
manity. The  astonishment  of  Mary,  on  re- 
ceiving this  information,  induced  her  to  in- 
quire how  events  so  marvellous  as  those  an- 
nounced were  posssible.  "  Hoiv  shall  this 
he,  seeing  I  know  not  a  man  ?  And  the  angel 
answered  and  said  unto  her.  The  Holy  Ghost 


OF    CHRIST. 


65 


shall  come  upon  thee,  and  the  poiver  of  the 
Highest  shall  overshudoiv  thee :  therefore  also 
that  holy  thing  ivhich  shall  he  horn  of  thee  shall 
he  called  the  Son  of  God.'^''  The  energy  of 
two  persons  in  the  Godhead  is  represented  as 
engaged  in  the  formation  of  our  Lord's  hu- 
man nature.  These  persons  are  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  the  Highest  or  Father. 

The  question  to  be  decided,  is  what  object 
was  termed  the  Son  of  God  ?  Was  it  the 
human  nature  considered  by  itself?  This  it 
could  not  be,  seeing  that  humanity  never  ex- 
isted of  itself,  without  inhering  in  the  Divi- 
nity. Was  it  the  humanity  and  Divinity 
when  united,  which,  in  consequence  of  their 
union,  obtained  this  as  a  new  appellation  ? 
We  apprehend  that  it  was  not.  We  conceive 
that  the  peculiarly  appropriate  name  of  our 
Lord's  Divine  person  is  Son  of  God ; — that 
his  person  was  not  changed  by  the  assump- 
tion of  humanity,  and  that  it  is  his  eternal 
person,  in  the  complex  natures  of  Divinity 
and  humanity,  which  is  denominated  Son  of 
God. 

In  summing  up  our  observations  on  the 
Incarnation,  and  in  proof  of  the  foregoing 
conclusions,  we  shall  consider  the  scope  of 
the  angel's  enunciation  of  the  names  of  oijr 

6* 


66  THE    ETERNAL    30N9HIP 

,  Lord.  Luke  i.  30—35.  "  And  the  angel  said 
unto  her,  Fear  not,  Mary:  for  thou  hast 
found  favour  with  God.  And,  behold,  thou 
shalt  conceive  in  thy  womb,  and  bring  forth 
a  Son,  and  shalt  call  his  name  JESUS.  He 
shall  be  great,  and  shall  be  called  the  Son  of 
the  Highest:  and  the  Lord  God  shall  give 
unto  him  the  throne  of  his  Father  David  : 
And  he  shall  reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob 
for  ever ;  and  of  his  kingdom  there  shall  be 
no  end.  Then  said  Mary  unto  the  angel.  How 
shall  this  be,  seeing  I  know  not  a  man  ?  And 
the  angel  answered  and  said  unto  her.  The 
Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  the 
power  of  the  Highest  shall  overshadow  thee  : 
therefore  also  that,  holy  thing  which  shall  be 
born  of  thee  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  God." 
Matth.  i.  20.  "  But,  while  he  (Joseph)  thought 
on  these  things,  behold,  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
appeared  unto  him  in  a  dream,  saying,  Joseph, 
thou  son  of  David,  fear  not  to  take  unto  thee 
Mary  thy  wife :  for  that  which  is  conceived 
in  her  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  she  shall 
bring  forth  a  son,  and  thou  shalt  call  his  name 
JESUS :  for  he  shall  save  his  people  from 
their  sins.  (Now,  all  this  was  done,  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the 
Lord  by  the  Prophet,  saying,  Behold,  a  virgin 


OF  chUisi.  67 

shall  be  witli  child,  and  sliall  bring  fortJi  a 
son,  and  they  shall  call  his  name  Emmanuel, 
which,  being  interpreted,  is,  God  with  us.) 
Then  Joseph,  being  raised  from  sleep,  did  as 
the  Angel  of  the  Lord  had  bidden  him,  and 
took  unto  him  his  wife:  and  knew  her  not 
till  she  had  brought  forth  her  first-born  Son : 
and  he  called  his  name  JESUS." 

It  is  affirmed  by  the  angel  that  the  Virgin 
should  conceive  and  bring  forth  a  son.  The 
language  employed  is  in  accordance  with  the 
usual  notions  of  mankind.  The  angel  an- 
nounces an  appearance,  viz.  that  of  a  son 
born  and  indicated  in  the  ordinary  manner. 
This  substance,  when  conceived  and  born, 
was  to  receive  from  men  a  designation  or 
name,  according  to  Divine  appointment. — 
This  name  is  given  for  a  two-fold  reason: 
first,  an  obvious  and  established  custom  among 
men,  to  assist  them  in  distinguishing  one  es- 
pecial appearance  in  human  nature  from  ano- 
ther; second,  to  denote,  not  only  his  especial 
appearance,  or  to  affix  an  epithet  to  the  like- 
ness he  bore,  but,  likewise,  to  denote  and  dis- 
tinguish the  character,  employment,  and  ob- 
ject, for  which  this  peculiar  appearance  was 
conceived,  and  was  born,  and  did  act,  viz. — to 
save  his  people  from  their  sins.     This  name 


68 


THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 


was  Jesus.  The  name  was  given  by  Divine 
appointment ;  but  was  not,  de  facto, — actually 
given  by  God.  It  was  his  will  that  it  should 
be  given  ;  and  the  deed  of  naming  devolved 
on  man.  The  name  is  announced  prospec- 
tively, as  an  act  to  take  effect  when  the  ap- 
pearance was  presented  to  the  world.  In  the 
angel's  address,  he  says  to  Mary,  "  TViow," 
consequent  on  the  conception  and  birth, 
"  shalt  call  his  name  JESUS."^^  In  his  ad- 
dress to  Joseph,  he  says  that  Mary  should 
bring  forth  a  son, — "  and  thou  (Joseph)  shalt 
call  his  name  JESUS.^^  This  act  of  naming 
was,  therefore,  dependent,  in  its  execution,  on 
the  deeds  of  men.  There  is  a  chain  of  events, 
in  this  transaction^  connected  with  the  exis- 
tence and  deeds  of  mortals.  The  conception 
and  birth  were  connected  with  the  existence 
of  Mary, — and  the  subsequent  deed  of  nam- 
ing was  rendered  dependent  on  the  act  of 
Mary,  and  on  the  act  of  Joseph.  Each  of 
them  was  separately  assured  that  he  and  she 
should  thus  nominate  the  appearance  which 
should  come  into  the  world ;  and,  in  conse- 
quence, Joseph  "  called  his  name  JESUS.^^ 
The  appearance  of  Jesus  in  the  flesh  was  an 
act  emanating  from  the  aspect  of  God  to- 
wards man.     It  was  not  inherent  in  the  Di- 


OF    CHRIST.  69 

vine  essence  like  its  own  necessary  existence 
and  natural  attributes ;  it  was  occasioned  by 
the  situation  of  man,  and,  therefore,  in  re- 
gard to  the  actual  existence  of  God,  was  a 
contingent  display  of  the  Deity.  The  name 
assigned  to  the  appearance  of  our  Lord,  arose 
from  his  contingent  appearance,  indicative 
of  his  aspect  to  man.  But  the  other  names, 
announced  by  the  Angel,  were  not  contin- 
gent ;  they  did  not  depend  on  his  aspect  to- 
wards man ;  nor  did  they  result  from  the  si- 
tuation of  man.  "  He  shall  be  great,  and 
shall  be  called  the  son  of  the  Highest."  The 
vastest  range  of  human  intellect, — the  most 
gorgeous  appearance  of  man's  energies  and 
workmanship  employed  in  his  service,  could 
not  render  him  great.  The  achievements  of 
this  glorious  one,  in  rescuing  man  from  the 
deepest  abyss  of  degradation  and  misery  could 
not  give  him  greatness;  for  that  greatness 
must  have  preceded,  and  been  the  source  of, 
his  achievements  in  effecting  their  rescue. 
His  greatness,  therefore,  was  inherent  in  him- 
self. It  was  lodged  in  his  nature,  and  its  ex- 
hibitions were  dependent  on  himself,  and  not 
on  man.  Human  nature  is  not  possessed  of 
absolute  greatness.  All  its  greatness  is  com- 
parative :  its  displays  result  from  opportunities 


70  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

— are  dependent  on  the  existence  of  fellow 
men,  and  are  consequent  on  their  inferiority 
in  physical  and  mental  endowments.  A  breath 
may  create  it ;  a  breath  may  wither  it.  The 
greatness  of  Christ  w^as  not  thus  contingent 
and  fleeting.  "  Of  his  kingdom  there  shall 
be  no  end.'*  It  was  before  man ;  the  situa- 
tion of  man  could  not  produce  it ; — it  could 
only  give  occasion  for  its  exercise.  His  hu- 
man nature,  therefore,  was  not,  in  itself,  ab- 
solutely great,  but  must  have  had  another 
source  of  influential  greatness.  The  Divine 
nature  and  person  displayed,  through  it,  the 
inherent  and  absolute  greatness  of  Godhead. 
Collateral  with  this  greatness  is  his  name ; 
"  and  he  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  the  High- 
est." Had  his  greatness  been  human,  there 
might  have  been  room  for  supposing  that  this 
designation  "  Son  of  the  Highest,"  was  a 
figurative  expression.  But  his  greatness  is 
real.  Its  reality  was  not  essentially  connected 
with  human  nature.  His  collateral  epithet 
must  correspond  with  his  real  greatness ;  it 
is  founded  on,  and  inseparable  from,  that 
greatness.  His  greatness  is  a  quality  inher- 
ing in  him.  Collateral  with  that  greatness 
is  his  state,  —  a  related  state  of  existence, 
termed  Son — descriptive  of  him   wdio   wa§ 


Of    CHRIbT.  71 

invested  with  greatness.  Where  the  rea- 
lity of  his  greatness  is  found,  there  must 
also  the  Sonship  of  the  Highest  be  found. 
In  his  Divinity  alone  he  is  absolutely 
^^  great  ;^^  —  in  his  Divinity  alone  he  is 
*^  Son  of  the  Highest. "  This  designation 
depended  not  on  mortals ;  their  deeds  could 
no^  affect  it;  their  wish  to  honour  or  disho- 
nour him  could  not  increase  or  diminish  his 
quality  of  greatness,  nor  render  more  or  less 
true  his  related  state  of  *'  Son  of  the  Highest." 
Men  were  participant  in  conferring  on  him 
the  term  Jesus — "  Thou  shalt  call  his  name 
JESUS."  The  will  or  intention  of  men  had 
no  participation  in  the  term  "  Son  of  the 
Highest;"— "/Ze  shall  be  called,  &c.— "  In 
the  one  case  they  were  to  act  as  instruments ; 
in  the  other,  they  were  to  acknowledge  and 
honour,  him  in  that  state  which  could  not  be 
caused  by  the  creation  or  extinction  of  the 
human  race.  The  angel  continues,  "  there- 
fore also  that  holy  thing  which  shall  be  born 
of  thee  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  God. "  This 
collateral  designation  is  also  independent  of 
the  will  or  caprice  of  mortals.  They  have 
no  farther  concern  with  it  than  to  receive  it. 
Essentially  connected  with  his  "  greatness, " 
and   his  related  state  as  *'  Son  of  the  High- 


72  THE    ETERNAL    SONiiHIP 

est,"  is  his  epithet—"  Son  of  God."  In  that 
nature  in  which  he  was  absolutely  great,  he 
was  Son  of  the  Highest,  or  Son  of  God. — As 
we  have  already  shown  that  his  greatness 
preceded  his  human  appearance,  and  was 
necessarily  in  himself,  this  quality  must  have 
inhered  in  him  in  his  «tate  collateral  with  its 
existence.  That  state  is  announced  to  be  the 
Son  of  the  Highest,  the  Son  of  God. — Eter- 
nal as  his  greatness,  is  his  eternity,  as  Son 
of  the  Highest,  as  Son  of  God. 

Matthew  says,  that  in  the  incarna- 
tion, ancient  prophecy  was  fnlfilled.  "  Be- 
hold, a  virgin  shall  be  with  child,  and  shall 
bring  forth  a  son,  and  they  shall  call  his 
name  Emmanuel,  which,  being  interpreted, 
is,  God  with  us.  In  the  fulfilment  of  this 
prophecy,  events  are  announced,  in  some  of 
which  mankind  were  to  act  as  instruments, 
and  be  participant  in  the  transaction.  The 
being  with  child,  and  the  birth,  were  connect- 
ed with  the  existence  of  Mary.  But  the  fact 
of  being  "  Emmanuel,  God  with  us,  "  did  not 
depend  on  the  existence  of  the  Virgin,  or 
of  any  other  individual,  or  set  of  individuals. 
He  must  have  been  in  the  nature  of  God  pre- 
viously to  his  appearance,  otherwise  the  then 
generation  of  mortals,  and  the  fact  of  his  re- 


OF   CHRIST.  73 

sidence  amongst  them,  not  the  qualities  of 
his  nature,  would  have  constituted  him  God. 
But  this  is  an  impossibility.  "  Before  Abra- 
ham was,"  or  Abraham's  children  were,  he 
was  "  God  with  us."  He  was  not  thus  desig- 
nated by  any  specific  act,  or  by  any  specific 
individual, — as  he  was  termed  Jesus,  but 
'Hheij,  (i.  e.  generally,)  shall  call"  him  "God 
with  us."  The  third  person  is  idiomatically 
used  to  signify  general  expression,  or  general 
fact.  They  shall  call,  synonymous  with  he 
shall  be  called.  Thus,  in  English,  we  write 
and  speak,  they  say,  they  shall  say,  for  it  is 
said,  it  shall  be  said:  In  French,  07i  dit, — one 
says,  for  they  say,  it  is  said.  When  Christ 
appeared  in  the  flesh,  he  was  to  be  generally 
called  "  God  with  us,"  as  a  necessary  conse- 
quence of  his  Godhead. 

There  are,  therefore,  two  parts  in  the  dif- 
ferent declarations  of  the  angel.  The  one 
specifies  the  humanity  of  our  Lord,  and  the 
time  in  which  that  humanity  should  be  de- 
signated "Jesus."  It  particularizes  the  in- 
dividuals who  should  be  employed  to  give 
effect  to  this  designation.  It  details  the  con- 
nexion of  the  human  race  with  that  event, 
and  the  miraculous  conception  and  birth  col- 
lateral with  the  existence  of  that  race.  The 
7 


74  THE   ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

Other  part  of  the  declaration  announces  the 
being  and  qualities  of  him  who  came; — 
their  self-existent,  eternal,  and  immutable 
aspect  in  the  Godhead; — the  self-existent, 
eternal,  and  immutable  "greatness,"  or  "great- 
ness" of  the  Godhead,  which  he  possessed ; 
— the  related  state  in  which  he  existed  divine- 
ly "  great,"  viz.  the  "  Son  of  the  Highest," 
"  Son  of  God ;" — the  nature  which  he  pos- 
sessed, viz.  that  of  "  God;" — the  aspect  of 
that  nature  to  man  when  he  came, — "  God 
with  us." 


OF    CHRIST.  75 


CHAPTER  VI 


Examination  of  Passages  of  Scripture,  ivhich 
prove  our  LorcVs  Sonship  to  be  Eternal 

Christ  is  affirmed,  by  the  apostle  Paul,  to 
be  the  Son,  and,  as  Son,  to  possess  the  qua- 
lities of  Godhead.  Hebrews  i.  1.  "  God, 
who  at  sundry  times,  and- in  divers  manners, 
spake  in  time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  pro- 
phets, hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  unto  us  by 
his  Son,  ivhom  he  hath  appointed  heir  of  all 
things,  by  whom  also  he  made  the  ivor  Ids :  who 
being  the  brightness  of  his  glory,  and  the  ex- 
press image  of  his  person ,  and  upholding  all 
things  by  the  word  of  his  power,  ivhen  he  had 
by  himself  purged  'our  sins,  sat  down  on  the 
right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high :  being  made 
so  much  better  than  the  angels,  as  he  hath  by 
inheritance  obtained  a  more  excellent  name 
than  they.  For  unto  ivhich  of  the  angels  said 
he  at  any  time,  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day 
have  I  begotten  thee  ?  And  again,  I  will  be  to 
him  a  Father,  and  he  shall  be  to  me  a  Son  ? 


76  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

And  again,  ivhen  he  hringeth  in  the  first  be- 
gotten into  the  world ,  he  saith.  And  let  all  the 
angels  of  God  ivorship  him,''''  &:c. 

The  apostle  affirms  that,  instead  of  the 
former  revelation  by  prophets,  God  had  "  in 
these  last  days  spoken  unto  us  by  his  Son^ 
To  this  person,  different  acts  and  qualitie^s 
are  ascribed.  The  reader  will  remember  our 
remarks  on  related  terms,  showing  that  all 
words  denoting,  or  illustrative  of,  such  terms, 
must  be  obtained  from  the  ordinary  usages 
of  language,  and  originally  derived  from  sen- 
sible objects.  In  correspondence  with  this 
wsage,  is  the  present  passage.  A  character 
is  introduced  whose  employment  is  to  speak 
to  the  Church;  his  name  is  given,  denoting 
a  related  state, — "  Son"  of  God.  We  have, 
then,  to  ascertain,  from  the  context,  whether 
this  related  state  be  essential  and  eternal  in 
the  Godhead,  or  arise  from  the  aspect  which 
this  person  bears  to  man, — and  whether  this 
be  a  necessarily  self-existent,  or  a  contingent- 
ly related  state. 

Of  this  person,  it  is  said,  '-'•  Whom  he  (God) 
hath  appointed  heir  of  all  things,  by  ivhom  also 
he  made  the  loorlds.''''  In  the  first  clause,  the 
passage,  as  Macknight  has  observed,  w^ould 
be  better  rendered  constituted,  instead  of  ap- 


6F   CHRIST.  77 

pointed^  Tieir  of  all  things.  There  is  no  phrase- 
ology in  reference  to  the  Son,  in  his  related 
state  to  the  Father,  which  could  describe  his 
possession  or  authority  over  all  things, — ex- 
cept that  of  "  /^eiV."  Whilst  the  one  Divine 
person  is  announced  as  Father,  it  is  inconceiv- 
able to  us  what  other  designation,  from  our 
stores  of  ideas  and  language,  could  be  em- 
ployed, unless  the  present  term.  For,  be  it 
remarked,  it  is  not  the  authority  and  power 
of  the  Godhead,  simply  considered,  in  its 
Divine  nature,  which  is  expressed, — but  the 
authority  and  power  of  a  person  related  to 
another  person  in  the  Godhead,  wliich  is  de- 
scribed. Instead,  therefore,  of  denoting  in- 
feriority in  him  who  is  constituted  "  heir  of 
all  things,^^  or  priority  in  him  who  does  con- 
stitute him, — we  only  discover  that  our  no- 
tions have  no  other  resources,  in  describing 
the  power  and  property  mutually  enjoyed,  in 
the  related  state  of  Father  and  Son, — than 
to  denominate  the  latter  heir.  The  expres- 
sion, therefore,  no  more  denotes  inferiority 
on  the  part  of  the  Divine  Son,  than  the  ex- 
pression Father,  implies  that  the  Father  will 
die,  and  be  succeeded  in  his  power  and  au- 
thority by  the  Son. — The  latter  position  will 
not  be  affirmed  by  the  boldest  opposers  of 


78  THE    ETERNAL    SON  SHIP 

the  Eternal  Sonship  ;  and,  if  they  themselves 
cannot  predicate  of  the  one  related  person 
what  the  words  literally  imply,— by  what 
refinement  of  sophistry  can  they  literally 
apply  these  words  to  the  other  ?  The  desig- 
nation "  heir, "  is  connected  with  that  of 
'*  Son,^^  and  is  employed  on  account  of  the 
use  of  the  latter  term.  Power,  dominion,  or 
authority,  would  have  expressed  Divine  sway 
over  created  objects ;  but  could  have  con- 
veyed no  idea  of  their  mutual  exercise,  in 
the  person  of  him,  who  stood  in  the  related 
state  of  Divine  Son  to  his  Divine  Father. — 
This  heirship  being  essentially  in  the  Son, 
must  be  of  the  same  nature  as  his  other  qua- 
lities ;  which,  if  they  are  ascertained  to  be 
eternal,  and  that  they  are  so  we  shall  imme- 
diately prove, — must,  likewise,  render  this 
heirship  eternal.  The  appointment,  there- 
fore, cannot  have  arisen  from  any  external 
circumstances  foreseen  or  existing ;  but  must 
be  constituted  by  the  inherent  nature  of  God- 
head itself.  The  mutual  possession  of  all 
things  is  attributed  to  God,  in  the  related 
states  of  the  Father  and  the  Son ;  and  this 
mutual  possession  causes  the  term  heir  to  be 
used  in  reference  to  the  latter  person. 

** by  ivhom  also  he  made  the  ivorlds.^^ 


OF    CHRIST. 


The  act  of  creation  is,  in  several  passages  of 
Scripture,  expressly  ascribed  to  God,  in  the 
person  of  the  Son.  It  is  an  act  of  omnipo- 
tence, which  could  be  only  exercised  by  God 

^  himself,  mediately  or  immediately.  That  it 
was  not  exercised  mediately  is  evident  from 
the  account  in  Genesis,  and  from  every  men- 
tion made  of  the  transaction  in  Scripture. 
This  person  must  be  Eternal  Son,  because  he 
could  not  have  been  rendered  Son  by  the  act 
of  creation,  or  by  any  proceedings  subsequent- 
ly occurring  amongst  created  existences; — 
otherwise,  creation  must  have  caused  a  change 
in  the  Divine  nature ; — the  finite  must  have 
changed  the  infinite,  and  introduced,  not  only 
a  change  in  the  Divine  nature,  but  must  have 

^  produced  the  existence  of  persons  in  that 
nature,  viz.  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost: 
— or  else  the  Son  must  stand  in  the  related 
state  of  Son  to  his  own  creation; — he  who 
created  must  occupy  the  situation  of  son  to 
that  which  he  did  create  and  which  differs 
from  his  own  nature  ; — but  these  suppositions 
are  manifestly  absurd.  The  Sonship  of  Christ 
is,  therefore,  independent  of,  and  unconnected 
with,  creation,  in  any  aspect.  It  is  absolute 
and  inherent  in  the  Godhead.  The  high- 
est grades  of  immortal  and   created   spirits, 


80  THE    ETERNAL    SOINSHIP 

thrones,  dominions,  principalities,  powers, 
spirits  of  the  just  men  made  perfect,  bow 
before  him. — There  is  a  peculiar  sublimity 
in  the  Apocalypse  when  describing  the  throng 
of  intellectual  beings  in  the  state  of  per- 
fection ; — the  congeries  of  minds  that  had 
blazed  in  unclouded  splendour  and  stainless 
purity ;  "  those  who  had  come  out  of  great 
tribulations ;"  those  whose  circuit  had  been 
through  myriads  of  worlds,  and  whose  only 
resting  place  and  halt  of  complete  develope- 
ment  of  knowledge  were  the  Divine  Being 
gnd  perfections ;  and  those  who  had  seen 
dimly,  darkly,  and  in  part,  the  depths  of 
creation,  providence,  and  redemption,  but 
who  were  then  "  seeing  face  to  face," — then 
"  knowing,  even  as  also  they  were  known," 
— all  these,  in  one  ascription  and  adoration, 
address  the  Son,  "  For  thy  pleasure  they  (all 
things)  are  and  w^ere  created." 

"  Who  being  the  brightness  of  his  glory , 
and  the  express  image  of  his  person.^^ 

He  who  was  the  effulgence  or  resplendent 
shining  or  brightness  of  his  Father's  glory, 
(for  all  these  terms  convey  the  meaning  of 
the  original,)  must  have  possessed  Divinity 
within  himself,  essentially  and  eternally.  If 
there  ever  was  a  time  when  the  Son  stood  not. 


OF    CHRIST.  81 

within  the  Godhead,  in  the  related  state  of 
8on  to  the  Father, — then,  there  was  a  time 
in  which  there  was  no  brightness  or  efful- 
gence of  the  Father's  glory  ;  because  it  is  the 
express  characteristic  of  the  Son  to  be  "  the 
brightness  of  the  Father^s  glory,'^'' — But  the 
glory  of  the  Godhead  is  inherent  w  ithin  it- 
self. Its  displays  to  man  cannot  render  it 
more  or  less  effulgent.  When  "  the  heavens 
declare  the  glory  of  God,"  they  only  exhibit 
the  glory  which  preceded,  and  which  now 
shines  in,  their  appearance.  Glory  is  only 
given  to  them,  as  a  medium,  to  "  declare"  its 
aspect  of  effidgence,  in  the  contingent  work 
of  creation.  The  glory  of  God  is  underived, 
like  the  self-existence  of  the  Godhead.  It  is 
the  source  of  all  glory.  Its  exhibition  and 
its  effulgence  or  brightness  are  different. — 
The  media  employed  to  declare  it,  and  its 
effulgence,  are  different ; — for  the  effulgence 
and  the  glory  are  collateral.  There  could  be 
no  glory  w  ithout  this  effulgence  ; — and  there 
could  be  uo  effulgence  without  this  glory. 
Their  collateral  existence  is  inseparable ; — • 
for,  without  this  brightness  or  effulgence, 
glory  is  stripped  of  the  principles  which  con- 
stitute it  to  be  glory,  and,  without  the  glory, 
the  effulgence  cannot  be  presented. — We  shall 


82  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

not,  at  present,  stop  to  inquire,  whether,  by 
the  Father's  glory,  the  apostle  intended  his 
nature  or  his  perfections  as  God.  Whichever 
of  these  we  understand  to  be  the  meaning, 
our  reasoning  remains  unaffected.  But,  from 
collateral  passages,  and  tlie  uniform  tenor 
of  Scripture,  it  is  evident,  that  he  meant 
to  specify  the  Divine  perfections.  (See  Ro- 
mans i.  23.)  If,  then,  there  ever  was  a  time, 
in  which  the  effulgence  of  the  Father's  glory 
or  perfections  was  not, — there  was  a  time, 
when  the  effulgence  of  his  glory  or  perfec- 
tions was  not  self-existent ;  and,  if  ever  the 
effulgence  was  not  self-existent,  it  was  not 
eternal,  immense,  and  immutable.  But,  we 
have  shown,  that  the  glory  and  its  effulgence 
are  collateral,  and  inseparable,  and,  in  conse- 
quence, what  is  predicated  of  the  efTulgence, 
is  also  predicated  of  the  glory  or  perfections. 
The  Divine  perfections,  therefore,  if  this  ef- 
fulgence be  not  self- existent,  are  not  self- 
existent,  eternal,  immense,  and  immutable ; 
and,  consequently,  the  Godhead  is  contin- 
gent. But  this  is  impossible.  Without  the 
eternity  of  this  effulgence,  there  could  nei- 
ther be  light,  nor  the  source  of  light, — life, 
nor  the  source  of  life.  There  could  neither 
be  Creator  nor  creation,-— the  Uncreated  noi 


OF    CHRIST.  83 

the  created  mind.  Without  the  eternity  of 
this  effulgence,  there  must  have  pervaded 
space,  the  long  night  "  of  nothingness." — 
Nay,  space  itself  could  not  have  been; — 
there  must  have  been  a  dreary  void,  which 
connot  be  conceived,- — because  it  is  impossi- 
ble. Without  the  eternity  of  this  effulgence, 
the  sun  could  not  have  ruled  the  day,  nor 
the  moon  the  night, — and  God,  and  Angels, 
and  men,  and  worlds,  and  earth,  and  all 
things,  must  have  been  absorbed  in  the  chaos 
of  nonentity.  As  this  effulgence  is  eternal, 
he  w^ho  possesses  it  must  be  eternal.  He  is 
the  Son ;  in  that  related  state,  he  possesses 
this  quality.  His  Sonship  and  his  effulgence 
are  coeval.  He  is,  therefore,  the  Eternal 
Son  of  God  the  Father. 

The  Son  is  "  the  express  image  of  his  per- 
sonJ^''  The  term  "  express  imcige,^^  must  mean 
likeness,  or  an  express  or  exact  representa- 
tive ;  because,  an  image  of  a  Divine  person, 
in  any  literal  sense,  is  an  impossibility.  "  His 
person'''^  refers  to  the  Divine  nature,  in  which 
this  person  is  Father.  The  Son  is  a  repre- 
sentative of  the  Father,  as  a  Divine  person, 
in  the  Divine  nature.  None  but  a  Divine 
person  can  be  an  express  representative  of 
another  Divine  person  in  the  Divine  nature. 


84  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

Now,  if,  in  any  moment,  the  Son  was  an  ex- 
press representative  of  the  Father,  the  Son 
must  have  been  so  from  all  eternity,  and 
must  be  so  in  self-existence.  For,  as  the  Fa- 
ther is  eternal  in  his  nature,  that  which  ex- 
pressly represents  him  must,  in  like  manner, 
be  eternal ;  otherwise,  it  could  not  be  an  ex- 
press representation.  It  could  only  be  a 
contingent  and  dependent  representation  of 
him ;  but  this  is  no  representation  of  him  in 
iiis  nature.  For,  the  express  representative 
of  the  nature  must  possess  the  express  qua- 
lities of  the  nature  of  him  whom  he  repre- 
sents. He,  who  is  this  representative,  must 
be  an  eternal  representative.  If  this  repre- 
sentative be  presumed  ever  to  have  had  a 
beginning,  or  to  have  arisen  from  an  aspect 
towards  man  in  the  representing  person,  then, 
the  express  representation  of  nature  could 
never  have  been.  For,  that  w^hich  has  a 
beginning,  or  is  derived  from  external  pro- 
cedure towards  creation,  and  is,  in  conse- 
quence, inseparably  connected  with  creation, 
could  not  have  been  a  representation  of  that 
nature  which  has  no  absolute  connexion  with 
creation,  and  is,  of  itself,  independently  of 
creation, — absolutely  eternal.  To  suppose  a 
commencement  of  essentially  eternal  repre- 


OF    CHRIST.  85 

seiitatioii,  is  to  suppose  the  impossibility  of 
an  essentially  eternal  representation  of  the 
Divine  nature.  But,  it  is  positively  affirmed, 
that  there  is  an  express  representation  of  the 
Divine  nature  in  the  person  of  the  Father. 
It  must,  therefore,  be  eternal.  Now,  this 
quality  of  express  representation  is  declared 
to  inhere  in  the  Son.  As  Son,  in  the  related 
state  of  Son,  he  is  the  express  image  or  re- 
presentation of  the  Father.  This  quality  is 
eternal ;  the  Son,  in  whom  this  quality  in- 
heres, is,  therefore,  Eternal  Son. 

The  aspect  of  the  Deity,  in  his  perfec- 
tions and  nature,  proclaims  the  Eternity  of 
the  Sonship.  The  aspect  of  the  Deity,  in 
his  procedure  with  man,  proclaims  the  same 
doctrine.  Yet,  there  is  this  difference ;  in 
his  aspect  as  Deity,  both  his  nature  and  per- 
fections, or  glory,  are  alike  indicative  of  the 
Eternal  Sonship ; — in  his  aspect  to  creation, 
his  perfections  are  exhibited  in  his  work- 
manship, while  his  nature  or  essence  can 
never  be  exhibited  by  it.  The  grand  display 
of  his  glory  is  within  the  Godhead,  and  is, 
therefore,  necessary,  and  constituted  by  it- 
self; the  contingent  exhibitions  of  that  glory 
are  discoverable  in  the  universe,  and  are  as 
perfect  and  complete  as  contingent  exhibi- 
8 


86  THE   ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

tions  can  be.  "  The  heavens  declare  the  glory 
of  God ;  and  the  firmament  sheweth  his  handy 
work.  Day  unto  day  uttereth  speech,  and 
night  unto  night  sheweth  knowledge."  The 
expanse  and  the  glorious  orbs  which  be- 
spangle it, — the  regularity  and  harmony  of 
their  motions, — the  splendour  of  their  hues, 
and  the  vastness  of  their  dimensions,  pro- 
claim the  glory  of  God,  displayed  in  their 
workmanship.  The  flood  of  radiance  poured 
from  the  sun,  and  the  mellow  light  of  the 
moon — declare  his  glory.  But,  glorious  as 
these  are  in  themselves,  they  tell  pf  a  pre- 
ceding, an  ineffable  glory,  employed  in  their 
construction  and  appearance.  Splendid  as 
they  are,  they  evince  that  there  is  another 
splendour,  which  even  the  "  heaven  of  hea- 
vens cannot  contain," — whicli  none  can  ex- 
hibit, except  the  Son,  who  is  the  effulgence 
of  the  Father's  glory.  He  possessed  this 
glory  before  all  worlds  ;  for  he  describes  it,  in 
addressing  the  Father,  as  "  the  glory  which 
he  had  with  him  before  the  world  was." 
This  glory  or  effulgence  of  the  Divine  per- 
fections could  not  be  essentially  increased 
or  diminished  by  his  appearance  in  the  flesh  ; 
for,  in  his  character  of  The  Word,  or  in  his 
absolutely   divine   nature,   the   apostle   John 


OF    CHRIST.  87 

says,  "  And  the  Word  was  made  flesh,  and 
dwelt  among  us,  (and  we  beheld  his  glory, 
the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Fa- 
ther,) full  of  grace  and  truth."  The  intel- 
ligences, who  display  the  powers  of  mind 
which  he  has  endowed,  exhibit  the  manifes- 
tations of  this  glory.  But,  whether  we  con- 
template the  range  of  angelic  spirit,  or  the 
mightiest  spirit  of  mortal,  they  are  only  con- 
tingent and  subordinate  to  the  essential  God- 
head. The  Seraph  who  has  veiled  his  face 
before  the  resplendence  of  the  Highesf,  and 
who,  immediately,  has  received  his  commands 
and  fulfilled  his  purposes, — the  mind  which 
has  soared  through  creation's  objects,  and 
scanned  creation's  laws, — which  has  enjoyed 
the  sublimest  of  the  sublime,  even  contem- 
plations of  the  manifold  displays  of  this  glo- 
ry,— these  beings  are  only  faint  scintillations, 
when  compared  with  the  energy  of  that  glo- 
ry "  which  eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear  heard, 
neither  can  it  enter  into  the  heart  of  man  to 
conceive." 

Whilst  we  are  thus  assisted,  by  intelli- 
gence and  materiality,  to  advance  some  steps 
in  the  investigation  of  the  effulgence  of  this 
glory,  as  manifested  unto  us,  and  whilst  we 
are  led  to  ascertain,  from  its  manifestation, 


88  THE    ETERNAL    SO^SHIi' 

what  it  is  in  itself, — we  have  no  external 
meMa  to  guide  us,  in  the  investigation  of  the 
express  representation  of  the  Father's  person 
in  the  Divine  essence.  This  theme  is  inscru- 
table bj  human  intellect.  What  that  essence 
is,  we  know  not.  Its  qualities  alone  can  be 
examined.  This  subject  eludes  all  the  capa- 
])ilities  of  thought.  It  is  beyond  creation ; 
its  margins  are  beyond  our  ken  ;  its  bounda- 
ries are  not  approachable  by  our  powers.  As 
far  as  known  to  us,  its  comprehension  is 
alone  with  that  Being  "  whose  goings  forth 
have  been  from  of  old,  from  everlasting." 
Farther  than  systems,  farther  than  minds,  far- 
ther than  thoughts  of  minds,  it  is  "  invisible" 
to  human  reasoning  and  human  conception, 
and  lies  with  the  '^  eternal,  immortal  King." 
We  are  surrounded  by  its  qualities  in  their 
manifested  brightness;  we  meet  them  in  the 
minutest  and  widest  existences  of  being, — 
yet  the  loftiest  aspiration  of  spirit  has  not 
ascended  to  the  height  of  the  knowledge  of 
the  substance,  in  which  these  qualities  inhere. 
The  brightest  ray  of  soul  has  set,  ere  it  could 
shine  on  this  midiscovered,  undiscoverable 
realm  of  immensity.  But  what  this  essence 
is,  the  Son  is; — in  his  related  state,  it  is  his 
essence,  and  with  it,  he  necessarily  enjoys  its 


OF    CHRIST.  89 

coeval  qualities.  He  is  self-existent,  eternal, 
immense,  immutable. 

As  by  his  omnipotence  the  Son  created  all 
things,  by  the  same  omnipotence  he  upholds 
all  things, — "  Upholding  all  things  by  the 
ivord  of  his  powerP  This  is  analogous  to  the 
declaration, — Colossians  i.  17.  "  By  him  all 
things  consist."  He  is  the  superintending, 
guiding  ruler  of  minds  and  of  spheres. 

Thus  far  the  Apostle  has  portrayed  the 
nature  in  which  this  person  was,  and  is,  the 
Son.  But,  from  the  indefinite  periods  of 
eternity, — from  the  indefinite  periods  before 
the  creation  of  worlds,  and  from  the  periods 
which  have  elapsed  during  their  continuance, 
— the  Apostle  turns  to  describe  actions  per- 
formed in  time,  connected  with  men,  and 
achieved  in  their  behalf.  At  the  time  *'  when 
he  (the  Son)  had  purged  our  sins^  he  sat  doivn 
at  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high,^^ 
The  act  of  making  purification  of  our  sins, 
could  not  have  been  accomplished  in  that 
Divine  nature,  in  which  the  Apostle  had  for- 
merly described  the  Son.  In  that  nature,  he 
could  not  make  purification  of  our  sins ;  con- 
sequently, this  purification  was  achieved  in 
that  nature  which  he  assumed, — the  assump- 
tion of  which  could  not  change  his  Divine 
8* 


90  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

nature,  and  could  not,  therefore,  affect  his 
Sonship,  which  is  inherent  in  that  nature. 
The  elevation  of  the  human  nature,  in  conse- 
quence of  its  union  with  the  Divine,  is  illus- 
trated ;  "  he  (in  that  human  nature,)  sat  doivn 
at  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high,^^ — 
meaning,  that  this  nature  obtained  the  highest 
possible  honour.  It  could  not,  literally,  oc- 
cupy the  right  or  left  of  the  Divine  Majesty ; 
there  being  no  such  places,  and  no  juxta- 
position connected  with  Deity. 

The  atonement  which  the  Son  effected  in 
our  nature,  and  the  consequent  elevation  of 
that  nature,  do  not  properly  enter  into  our 
present  investigation. 

We  have  now  shown,  from  the  passage 
examined,  that  the  Son  is  eternal  as  Son, 
because  he  is  "appointed"  or  constituted 
"  heir  of  all  things  ;"  because  "  he  made  the 
worlds;"  because  he  is  the  "brightness" 
or  effulgence  "  of"  the  Father's  "  glory" 
or  perfections ;  because  he  is  "  the  express 
image"  or  representation  "  of"  the  Father's 
*'  person"  in  the  Divine  nature  ;  and,  because 
he  "  upholds  all  things  by  the  word  of  his 
power." 

The  Apostle  continues  the  subject  in  a 


OF    CHRIST.  91 

dillierent  shade  of  sentiment.  Hitherto  he 
has  described  the  absolute  qualities  and  ac- 
tions of  the  Son,  in,  and  from,  himself,  and 
has  referred  to  what  he  accomplished  for 
men  in  the  purification  of  their  sins ;  but  he 
now  commences  a  comparison  of  this  Son 
with  the  created  objects,  which  were  most 
exalted  and  glorious  in  the  estimation  of  the 
Hebrews.  They  gloried  exceedingly  in  the 
law  of  Moses,  because  it  was  promulgated, 
and  often  enforced,  by  the  ministry  of  angels ; 
and  the  Apostle  illustrates  the  incomparably 
superior  nature  of  the  Son,-  in  consequence  of 
his  inherent  dignity :  "  Being  made  so  much 
better  than  the  angels,  as  he  hath  by  inheri- 
tance obtained  a  more  excellent  name  than 
they,^^ — The  recapitulation  of  the  Son's  inhe- 
rent nature,  and  the  procedure  and  grandeur 
of  his  achievements  in  human  nature,  have 
afforded  scope  for  the  delineation  of  the 
essential  excellency  of  the  Son ;  whilst  his 
comparative  greatness,  arising  from  what  he 
is  essentially  in  himself,  and  what  created 
beings  are  in  themselves,  affords  scope  for 
farther  elucidation  of  the  Son's  splendour. 
He  is  not  made  better  than  the  angels  by 
any  external  act,  but  he  is  in  himself  yivofjuvo? 
— being,  rather  than  being  made, — existing  so 


92  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

much  better  than  the  angels,  by  how  much 
he  hath  by  inheritaiice  Ki^^i^^ovoiMiKiv,  obtainedy 
— or  hath  inherited  a  more  excellent  name. 
He  is  Son,  and  whilst  the  Father  and  he  mu- 
tually enjoy  corresponding  designations  and 
dominion,  the  act  of  possessing  such  desig- 
nations and  dominion  must  be  expressed  in 
relative  terms.  To  the  Son,  such  possession 
is  ascribed  by  his  inheriting.  Neither  crea- 
tion, nor  any  act  of  creation,  could  cause 
him  to  inherit  the  name  of  Son ;  for  it  is  a 
related  state,  not  existing  between  creation 
and  him,  but  between  his  Father  and  him  in 
the  Godhead.  Creation  could  not  give  him 
inheritance  in  his  name  of  Son,  because  crea- 
tion is  posterior  to  him  and  to  his  work  as 
Son.  This  inheritance  is  consequently  in  the 
Divine  nature.  Others,  both  angels  and  men, 
obtained,  metaphorically,  this  excellent  name, 
but  it  was  by  their  creation  or  adoption,  not 
by  inheritance^  that  they  obtained  the  appella- 
tion of  sons  of  God.  It  was  an  external  act 
of  the  Deity  which  conferred  it;  but  the 
name  of  this  person,  as  Son,  is  underived ;  it 
is  inherited  in  his  nature  as  God,  and  his  in- 
heritance is  coeval  with  his  nature — Eternal. 
"  For  unto  which  of  the  angels  said  he  at 
any  time,  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I 


OF    CHRIST.  93 

begotten  thee?'"'  The  passage  from  which  this 
is  taken  is  Psalm  ii.  7.  "  I  will  declare  the 
decree:  the  Lord  hath  said  unto  me,  Thou 
art  my  Son ;  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee. 
Ask  of  me,  and  I  shall  give  thee  the  heathen 
for  thine  inheritance,  and  the  uttermost  parts 
of  the  earth  for  thy  possession.  Thou  shalt 
break  them  with  a  rod  of  iron ;  thou  shalt 
dash  them  in  pieces  like  a  potter's  vessel." 
It  is  obvious  that  the  first  part  of  these  ex- 
pressions used  after  the  word  decree,  cannot 
refer  to  the  subject  of  the  decree,  but  is  a 
prelude  intimating  the  related  state  of  the 
person  addressed.  The  events  of  the  decree 
are  announced  as  future, — transactions  which 
were  to  be  unfolded  in  the  development  of 
the  decree, — triumphs  which  were  to  be  ac- 
quired, and  which  were  to  be  the  result  of  a 
process.  But  this  promise  of  future  triumph 
was  made  to  a  person  who  then  was,  and, 
subsequently,  was  to  be.  He  is  described 
under  two  designations;  the  Messiah  or  the 
Anointed,  v.  2,  and  the  Son,  v.  7th  &  12th. 
But  the  actual  coming  of  the  Messiah  took 
place  at  the  incarnation  or  assumption  of  hu- 
man nature  by  the  second  person  of  the  God- 
head. It  is  admitted,  that  before  that  event, 
he  was  only  Messiah  prospectively,  not  de 


94  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

facto.  Previously  to  that  assumption,  this  was 
the  designation  that  would  be  his — not  the 
designation  that  actually  was  his.  If  he  was 
also  Son  prospectively,  and  not  de  facto ^  when 
this  enunciation  of  the  decree  was  made, — 
and  if  he  only  became  Son  when  the  decree 
began  to  take  effect,  then,  there  is  no  desig- 
nation of  any  person  actually  addressed.  But 
this  is  contrary  to  the  express  indication  of 
the  passage.  For  the  Son,  the  person  ad- 
dressed, is  represented  as  then  in  being,  as  the 
Son ; — the  homage  of  the  Kings  and  Judges 
of  the  earth  is  commanded  to  be  paid  to  him, 
and  blessings  are  indiscriminately  promised 
to  all  those  who  trust  in  him..  "  Blessed  are 
all  they  that  put  their  trust  in  him."  To  pay 
homage  in  obedience  and  love ;  to  trust  and 
obtain  blessings  in  him ;  to  kiss  or  love  this 
person  as  Son,  who  was  not  then  in  being  as 
Son — are  impossibilities,  and  absolute  con- 
tradictions in  terms.  Previously,  then,  to  his 
Messiahship,  and  independently  of  that  cha- 
racter, the  person  addressed,  at  that  time, 
existed.  But  the  enunciation  of  the  decree 
bears  intrinsic  evidence  of  the  then  existence 
of  this  person  as  Son.  *'  Thou  art  my  Son, 
this  day  have  I  begotten  thee.  Ask  of  me 
and  I  shall  give  -— — ."    ''  This  day  or  now  I 


OF    CHRIST.  95 

have  begotten^ — even  now  thou  art  with  me  as 
♦So??."  Thou  art  with  me  in  that  nature,  in 
that  absolute  Godhead,  to  which  "  a  thou- 
sand years  are  as  one  day,  and  one  day  as  a 
thousand  years."  "  This  day,^^  as  has  been 
well  remarked  by  the  Rev.  Adam  Gib,  of 
Edinburgh,  "  cannot  be  understood  as  pro- 
"  perly  denoting  m\y  one  of  inaii'^s  days,  either 
'^  in  David's  time  or  afterwards.  It  can  only 
*>  be  understood  of  God^s  day,  the  day  of  eter- 
"  nity;  which,  with  God,  is  all  one  day,  with- 
"  out  any  yesterday  or  to-morrow, — one  per- 
**  mament  day,  without  any  succession  of 
*'  parts, — a  perpetual  7ioiv,  co-existing  with 
**  every  one  of  man's  days.  Thus,  as  the 
"  great  Laither  observes,  upon  this  place  :  *  If 
**  *  we  will  speak  as  the  thing  is, — to-day, 
"  '  every  day,  and  always,  the  Son  of  God  is 
"  '  begotten  :  For,  in  eternity,  there  is  nei- 
"  *  ther  past  nor  future ;  but  a  perpetual  to- 
"  '  day.'^  And,  as  he  further  observes,  upon 
"  that  text :  '  to-day  is  here  to  be  taken  for 
"  '  God's  time,  not  ours:  For  God  is  not 
"  *  there  speaking  with  us,  but  with  him  who 
"  '  is  with  God  beyond  time.'  "  The  term, 
in  the  original,  signifying  day,  expresses  ei- 
ther the  definite  period  comprehended  under 
iorday,  or   any  indefinite   portion  of   time: 


96  THE   ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

whichever  of  these  meanings  we  adopt,  must 
be  determined  by  the  circumstances  in  the 
context.  As  we  have  evinced  that  the  state 
of  Son  w^as  prior  to  the  actual  Messiahship, 
and,  consequently,  not  derived  from  the  cir- 
cumstances of  creation — this  state  must  be 
inherent  and  inseparable  from  the  Godhead, 
and  must,  therefore,  be  Eternal. 

One  grand  objection  offered  to  our  inter- 
})retation  of  the  passage  is  the  phraseology, 
/  have  begotten  thee.  If  this  objection  refers 
to  the  expression  used,  we  reply,  it  is  the  only 
term  by  which  the  relation  of  twp  persons, 
when  described  as  that  of  Father  and  Son, 
r/an  be  delineated  to  the  human  understand- 
ing, when  the  mode  by  which  the  Son  be- 
comes participant  of  the  Father's  nature  is 
announced.  This  enunciation  in  Scripture  is 
only  to  us  indicative  of  the  fact  that  there  is 
such  a  participation  of  nature,  though  we 
cannot  apprehend  the  mode  or  process  of  the 
participation.  To  raise  an  objection  on  ac- 
count of  the  impossibility  of  a  process  ana- 
logous to  that  by  which  participation  is  ef- 
fected amongst  mankind,  is  to  rebut  a  diffi- 
culty which  is  raised  by  the  opponent  him- 
self, for  no  such  assertion  was  ever  made,  nor 
was  ever  such  notion  entertained  by  any  of 


UF    CHRIST.  97 

the  defenders  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eternal 
Sonship.     They  only  f^ffirm,  from  the  decla- 
ration of  Scripture,  that  there  is  a  mode  by 
which  the  nature  of  the  Father  is  partici- 
pated by  the  Son ;    and  that  the  fact  is  de- 
clared that  the  Son  is  begotten  by  the  Father, 
and  is  signified  by  the  only  term,  which  man- 
kind possess,  to  designate  the  mode  of  partici- 
pation of  nature  from  him  who  is  Father  to 
him  who  is  Son.     If  the  objectors  assert  that 
there  can  be  no  such  participation,  and,  con- 
sequently, no  mode  by  which  the  participa- 
tion is  effected,  their  statement  is,  in  fact, 
levelled  against  the  related  states  of  the  God- 
head, and  is  applicable  to  the  terms  Father 
and  Son,  as  well  as  to  the  proposition  that  the 
latter  person  is  begotten.     But  we  have  al- 
ready shown,  that  there  are,  and  must  be,  re- 
lated states  in  the  Godhead.     If  the  objectors 
affirm  that  we  cannot  understand  the  mode  of 
the  alleged  participation,  we  need  not  join 
issue.     In  this,  we  perfectly  agree,  and  con- 
fess that  the  mode  of  this  participation  is  as 
incomprehensible  to  us  as  to  them. 

The   Apostle   quotes   this    enunciation   of 

the  Son's  eternal  existence  to  distinguish  the 

difference  of  the  foundation  of  his  Sonship 

from  that  of  angels  and  men,  in  their  relation 

9 


98  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

to  God.  The  emphasis  of  the  sentence  is 
laid  on  begotten,  opposed  to  the  sonship  of 
angels  and  men,  which  is  only  figurative. 
This  latter  sort  of  sonship  does  not  arise  from 
participation  of  the  Divine  nature,  but  is 
founded  on  the  act  of  creation  or  adoption. 
Christ,  in  the  person  of  the  Son,  took  to  him-' 
self  this  designation:  John  iii.  16.  "  For  God 
so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  he- 
gotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him 
should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life." 
If  the  term  only  begotten  Son,  be  said  to  apply 
to  Christ,  on  account  of  his  miraculous  con- 
ception, there  can,  then,  be  no  more  reason 
for  giving  this  epithet  to  Christ,  than  to 
iVdam,  who  was  as  much  the  immediate  and 
extraordinary  workmanship  of  God,  as  the 
body  of  Christ  was  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Paul 
repeats  this  enunciation  when  referring  to 
Christ's  resurrection ;  Acts  xiii.  32,  33.  "  And 
we  declare  unto  you  glad  tidings,  how  that 
the  promise  which  was  made  unto  the  fa- 
thers, God  hath  fulfilled  the  same  unto  us 
their  children,  in  that  he  hath  raised  up  Jesus 
again  ;  as  it  is  also  written  in  the  second 
Psalm,  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I 
begotten  thee."  This,  however,  cannot  im- 
port, that  by  raising  Christ  from  the  dead, 


OF    CHRIST.  99 

God  begat  him  into  the  relation  of  a  Son  ; 
for,  in  that  case,  every  one  whom  God  has 
raised,  or  shall  raise  from  the  dead,  will  there- 
by be  his  only  begotten  Son,  But  God,  by 
that  event,  declared,  but  did  not  constitute 
the  Messiah,  in  his  Divine  nature,  to  be  his 
only  begotten  Son, — in  defiance  of  the  machi- 
nations of  the  Jewish  rulers  and  priests,  who 
put  him  to  death  and  crucified  him,  in  his 
human  nature,  as  a  blasphemer,  because  he 
asserted  that  he  was  the  Son  of  God,  "  mak- 
ing himself  equal  with  God."  To  show  the 
truth  of  Christ's  assertion,  God,  by  the  resur- 
rection, declared  him  to  be  what  he  really 
was,  and  enabled  men  to  apprehend  and  ac- 
knowledge him,  in  the  eternity  of  his  Son- 
ship  ;  but,  by  that  transaction,  he  did  not 
constitute  him  Son  of  God.  Romans  i.  3,  4. 
**  Concerning  his  Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord, 
which  was  made  of  the  seed  of  David,  ac- 
cording to  the  flesh,  and  declared  to  be  the 
Son  of  God  with  power,  according  to  the  spi- 
rit of  holiness,  by  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead."  Christ  had,  before  this,  been  declared 
to  be  the  Son  of  God  by  voices, — particularly 
at  his  baptism.  In  Hebrews  v.  5.  "  So  also 
Christ  glorified  not  himself  to  be  made  an 
High  Priest;    but  he  that  said   unto   him, 


100       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

Thou  art  my  Son,  to-day  have  I  begotten 
thee."  Christ  is  affirmed  not  to  glorify  him- 
self as  Messiah  or  Mediator,  when  he  was 
made  High  Priest,  for  he  had  glory  whicli 
no  Priesthood  or  Mediatory  office  could  give 
him,  even  the  glory  which  he  enjoyed  with 
his  Father.  Christ  himself  announces  that 
he  was  Son  before  his  incarnation,  which 
event,  therefore,  could  neither  confer  nor 
affect  Sonship.  John  iii.  17.  "  For  God  sent 
not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the 
world ;  but  that  the  world  through  him  might 
be  saved."  In  the  state  in  which  he  was  from 
everlasting,  he  was  sent,  after  the  language 
of  men,  to  fulfil  the  purposes  of  redeeming 
love. 

We  have  shown  that  the  person  described 
by  the  Psalmist,  and  referred  to  by  the  Apos- 
tle, is  really  and  essentially  Son,  that  is,  he 
is  begotten  by  the  Father.  He  is  not  con- 
stituted begotten  Son  by  incarnation,  be- 
cause, according  to  the  second  Psalm,  he  was 
in  being  as  Son  before  the  incarnation  :  ho- 
mage and  love  were  to  be  given  to  him ; 
blessings  were  in  him,  and  he  was  the  object 
of  trust  or  reliance,  as  Son,  before  incarna- 
tion. He  is  not  constituted  begotten  Son  by 
the  miraculous  formation  of  his  human  na 


OF    CHRIST.  101 

ture  in  the  womb,  because,  the  formation  of 
Adam  was  equally  the  miraculous  work  of 
God,  yet  Adam  did  not,  and  could  not,  by 
that  event,  become  participant  of  the  Divine 
nature.  Our  Lord  is  not  constituted  begot- 
ten Son  by  his  resurrection,  for,  in  that  case, 
all  who  were  ever  raised  by  the  resurrection 
would,  thereby,  become  begotten  sons  of  God, 
participant  of  his  nature; — an  impossibility. 
He  came  into  the  world  existing  as  Son,  for 
he  was  sent  not  to  become  Son,  but,  as  Son, 
to  effect  that  purpose  which  could  only  be  ef- 
fected by  himself.  As  none  of  the  circum- 
stances of  creation  did  constitute  him  begotten 
Son,  he  can  only  be  so  in  the  Godhead. 

"  Thou  art  my  Son,"  says  God,  "  this  day 
have  I  begotten  thee."  Begotten  is  the  term 
meaning,  in  the  universal  acceptation  of  man- 
kind, the  notion  of  participation  of  nature 
and  qualities  enjoyed  by  one  person  (Father,) 
and  received  by  another,  (Son,)  existing  in 
related  states.  It  is  quite  immaterial  to  our 
argument  at  what  time  this  begetting  is  un- 
derstood to  be  predicated,  as  it  is  a  begetting 
of  nature  and  qualities.  Whether  it  is  af- 
firmed to  be,  at  the  present  moment  in  which 
we  write,  or  at  any  previous  or  future  period, 
— ^the  reality  of  the  begetting  or  being  begot- 
9* 


102  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

ten^  cannot  be  affected.  It  cannot  be  altered 
by  the  use  of  terms,  definite  or  indefinite.  It 
was  true  at  the  period  when  David  wrote, 
centuries  before  tlie  incarnation;  it  was  true 
when  the  angel  announced  the  circumstance 
to  Mary,  immediately  before  the  incarnation, 
and  when  the  voice  from  heaven,  after  the 
incarnation,  proclaimed  it  on  the  banks  of  the 
Jordan,  and  on  the  mountain  of  transfigura- 
tion. Now,  if  the  Son  be  begotten  by  the 
Father,  he  is  participant  of  the  Father's  na- 
ture and  qualities,  for  the  very  idea  of  this 
begetting,  which  does  not  occur  in  creation, 
or  by  means  of  creation,  implies  the  partici- 
pation of  nature  and  qualities.  If  the  Son 
be  participant  of  the  nature  and  qualities  of 
the  Father,  he  must  possess  the  quality  of 
Eternity,  which  is  essential  to  the  nature  of 
the  Father.  And  as  the  procedure  of  the 
absolute  Godhead,  within  itself,  must  be  col- 
lateral with  the  nature  and  qualities  of  God- 
head, the  procedure  of  the  Father  in  beget- 
ting, and  of  the  Son  in  being  begotten,  must 
be  Eternal.  If  true,  at  any  one  moment,  it 
must  be  true  this  day,  and  yesterday,  and 
to-morrow, — from  everlasting  to  everlasting. 
The  begetting  by  the  Father  cannot  cease, 
for  it  is  inherent  in  him,  as  absolute  God,  to 


OF   CHRIST.  103 

beget,  independently  of,  and  before,  all  cre- 
ation. The  Son  cannot  cease  to  be  begot- 
ten, for  it  is,  in  like  manner,  inherent  in 
him,  as  absolute  God,  independently  of,  and 
before,  all  creation,  to  be  begotten.  If  the 
fact  of  the  participation  of  nature  be  true,  at 
any  one  period,  it  is  true  for  ever,  because 
the  nature  is  eternal,  and  must,  in  all  times, 
possess  eternity  in  its  qualities  and  absolute 
procedure.  The  procedure  of  God,  in  cre- 
ation, can  be  considered,  according  to  our 
notions,  as  consummated  at  different  times: 
the  procedure  of  God,  within  his  nature,  can 
never  be  consummated,  for,  in  that  nature, 
there  is  no  "  variableness,  neither  shadow  of 
turning."  In  it,  there  is  neither  beginning 
nor  end  ;  in  it,  there  is  neither  commence- 
ment nor  consummation ;  w  hat  is.  true  con- 
cerning it,  is  true  for  ever. 

The  Apostle  continues  the  enunciation  of 
the  Son's  titles  to  ascendency: — '^ And  again, 
I IV ill  be  to  kirn  a  Father,  and  he  shall  be  to 
me  a  Son.^^ 

In  the  enumeration  of  Christ's  qualities 
and  actions,  in  the  beginning  of  this  chapter, 
there  is  a  striking  intermixture  observable 
in  the  recapitulation.  The  Apostle  mingles 
those  qualities  and  actions,  which  are  only 


104  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

applicable  to  absolute  Deity,  with  those  con- 
nected with  his  appearance  in  the  flesh,  as 
Messiah,  and  with  what  was  accomplished 
in  that  character.  He  ascribes  to  our  Lord 
attributes  essential  to  his  being  as  God,  in 
connexion  with  those  peculiar  to  his  office  as 
Mediator.  He  obviously  supposes  that  those 
who  perused  his  epistle  would  be  able,  from 
their  previous  knowledge,  to  apply  his  re- 
marks to  the  respective  and  specific  natures 
alluded  to,  without  a  distinct  mention  of  each 
nature,  when  he  ascribed  perfections  and 
achievements  to  it.  Those,  who  do.  not  pos- 
sess that  knowledge  of  Christ's  respective 
natures,  which  the  Apostle  pre-supposes, 
must  be  involved  in  great  difficulty,  when 
endeavouring  to  investigate  the  qualities  and 
actions  which  are  thus  intermingled.  This 
knowledge  can  only  be  attained  by  a  care- 
ful perusal  of  all  corresponding  passages, 
by  an  accurate  examination  of  the  places 
where  the  person  and  nature  of  Christ  are 
described,  and  by  strict  and  just  attention 
to  the  connexion  of  the  verses  of  this  chap- 
ter. The  difficulty  is  increased,  and  rendered 
almost  perplexing,  when,  as  in  the  present 
process,  the  same  interchanging  application 
is  introduced  to  prove  Christ's  ascendency. 


OF    CHRIST.  105 

While  one  step  must,  by  fair  interpretation, 
be  referred  to  his  qualities  in  the  Godhead, 
another  step,  by  interpretation  equally  just, 
must  be  referred  to  his  power,  offices,  and  ac- 
tions, in  his  Mediatorial  capacity.  The  ex- 
planation and  application  must  not  depend 
on  our  own  arbitrary  selection,  or  on  pre-con- 
ceived  opinion,  but  on  legitimate  reference 
to  the  passages  quoted,  indicating  the  pro- 
cess of  reasoning  which  the  Apostle  has  ac- 
tually chosen,  not  the  reasoning  which  we 
would  choose  for  him. 

The  passage  last  quoted'  is  taken  by  the 
Apostle  from  2  Samuel  vii.  12 — 17.;  and  1 
Chronicles  xvii.  4 — 15,  in  the  revelation 
made  to  Nathan,  and  not  from  the  revela- 
tion made  to  David,  1  Chronicles  xxii.  8 — 
10.  and  xxviii.  6,  7.  In  these  latter  places, 
the  words  are,  "He  shall  be  my  Son,  and  I 
xvill  be  his  Father,"  which  is  not  the  order 
in  which  they  are  quoted  by  the  Apostle. — 
The  revelation  made  to  Nathan  refers  pecu- 
liarly to  the  Messiah;  whilst  that  made  to 
David  has  reference  to  Solomon.  In  the  re- 
velation to  Nathan,  2  Samuel  vii.  12 — 14. 
it  is  said,  "When  thy  days  be  fulfilled,  and 
thou  shalt  sleep  with  thy  Fathers,  I  will  set 
up  thy  seed  after  thee,  w^hich  shall  proceed 


106       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

out  of  tliy  bowels,  and  I  will  establish  his 
kingdom.  He  shall  build  an  house  for  my 
name,  and  I  will  stablish  the  throne  of  his 
kingdom  for  ever.  I  will  be  his  Father,  and 
he  shall  be  my  Son,"  &c.  In  the  other  pas- 
sage, contained  in  the  revelation  to  Nathan, 
this  declaration  is  given  at  greater  length. 
1  Chronicles  xvii.  11—14.  "  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass,  when  thy  days  be  expired,  that 
thou  must  go  to  be  with  thy  fathers,  that  I 
will  raise  up  thy  seed  after  thee,  w^hich  shall 
be  of  thy  sons ;  and  I  will  establish  his  king- 
dom. He  shall  build  me  an  house,  and  I 
wdll  stablish  his  throne  for  ever.  I  will  be 
his  Father,  and  he  shall  be  my  Son ;  and  I 
will  not  take  my  mercy  away  from  him,  as  I 
took  it  from  him  that  was  before  thee:  But 
I  will  settle  him  in  mine  house,  and  in  my 
kingdom  for  ever;  and  his  throne  shall  be 
established  for  evermore."  But  Solomon 
was  appointed  king  during  David's  life.  (1 
Kings  i.  33,  34.)  Solomon  w^as  not  settled 
in  God's  house  or  temple,  and  was  not  raised 
up  by  David's  sons  after  the  reign  and  life 
of  David.  He  who  w^as  announced  to  Na- 
than, could  not,  therefore,  have  been  Solo^ 
mon,  but  must  have  been  the  Messiah  who 
w^as  "  settled  in  God's  house  or  temple,,  and 


OF    CHRIST.  10 

ill  God's  kingdom  for  ever,"  and  who  was 
both  Priest  and  King  in  that  spiritual  king- 
dom. In  the  enunciation  to  David,  Solomon 
is  expressly  mentioned :  1  Chronicles  x'x.iu 
9,  10.  "  Behold,  a  son  shall.be  born  to  thee, 
who  shall  be  a  man  of  rest,  and  I  wal  give 
him  rest  from  all  his  enemies  round  about: 
for  his  name  shall  be  Solomon,  and  I  will 
give  peace  and  quietness  unto  Israel  in  his 
days.  He  shall  build  an  house  for  my  name, 
and  he  shall  be  my  son,  and  I  will  be  his 
father ;  and  I  will  establish  the  throne  of  his 
kingdom  over  Israel  for  ever."  This  decla- 
ration is  not  consonant  with  the  circum- 
stances of  Messiah,  who  had  not  "  rest  from 
his  enemies,"  but  was  persecuted  and  cruci- 
fied by  them :  these  events,  however,  are  all 
strictly  applicable  to  Solomon.  In  the  enun- 
ciation to  Nathan,  David's  posterity  is  pro- 
mised the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  un- 
conditionally;  but  conditions  are  expressly 
annexed  in  the  revelation  to  David.  1  Chro- 
nicles xxviii.  7.  ''  Moreover,  I  will  establish 
his  kingdom  for  ever,  if  he  be  constant  to  do 
my  commandments  and  my  judgments,  as 
at  this  day."  David,  therefore,  enjoins  the 
service  of  the  Lord  on  Solomon,  v.  9.  "If 
thou  seek  him  he  will  be  found  of  thee  ;  but 


108  THE   ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

if  thou  forsake  him,  he  will  cast  thee  off  for 
ever."  If  it  be  said  that  this  interpretation 
of  these  passages  is  not  correct,  because  it 
is  affirmed,  in  2  Samuel  vii.  14,  15.  "  If  he 
commit  iniquity,  I  will  chasten  him  with  the 
rod  of  men,  and  with  the  stripes  of  the  chil- 
dren of  men :  But  my  mercy  shall  not  de- 
part away  from  him,"  &:c.  we  answer,  that  the 
word  "i'^«,  asher,  in  the  14th  verse,  translated 
ff  he,  ought,  as  Pierce  has  shown,  to  be  ren- 
dered whosoever,  i.  e.  "  whosoever  of  Messiahh 
subjects  committeth  iniquity,  I  ivill  chasten 
him  with  the  rod,^^  &c.  Various  passages 
might  be  adduced,  in  which  a  similar  transi- 
tion is  made  from  the  character  and  glorious 
reign  of  the  Messiah,  to  the  conduct  of  his 
professed  subjects  and  children.  Punishment 
is  denounced  on  his  professed  followers, 
"  if  they  commit  iniquity,  and  forsake  the 
law"  of  God.  In  Psalm  Ixxxix.  30—32.  a 
particular  illustration  of  this  mode  of  digres- 
sion is  exhibited.  As  we  assert  that  the  re- 
velation to  Nathan,  "  I  will  be  to  him  a 
Father,  and  he  shall  be  to  me  a  Son,"  is  ap- 
plicable to  the  Messiah  alone, — it  may  also 
be  objected  that  the  reasoning  of  the  apostle, 
proving  Christ's  superiority  over  the  angels, 
is  fallacious,  seeing  the  same  promise  was 


OF    CHRIST.  109 

made  to  David  respecting  Solomon,  who  was 
not,  thereby,  proved  to  have  been  superior  to 
the  angels.  But  the  promise  alluded  to  has 
a  meaning,  when  it  is  applied  to  Messiah, 
very  different  from  what  it  has  when  applied 
to  Solomon.  For,  in  the  former  case,  it  refers 
to  the  support  which  Messiah  would  receive 
during  the  period  of  his  appearance  on  earth 
— a  support  explained  by  the  declaration  of 
what  God  was  to  him  in  that  Divine  nature 
which  gave  his  Messiahship  all  its  value  and 
worth;  and,  in  the  latter  case,  it  refers  to 
the  peculiar  affection  and  care  which  God 
would  bestow  on  Solomon  as  his  adopted  son. 
God,  therefore,  declares  to  the  Messiah,  in 
prophecy,  what  he  would  do  for  that  nature, 
which  being  assumed  by  the  Son,  possessed 
Sonship  in  union  w  ith  his  Divine  nature. 

God,  in  the  first  declaration  in  this  (5th) 
verse,  speaks  of  the  conversation  and  inter- 
course within  the  Divine  nature.  "  Thou 
art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee." 
In  the  second  declaration,  he  does  not  say,  I 
will  beget  him  (as  Son)  and  he  (the  Son) 
shall  be  begotten  by  me,  in  his  Mediatorial 
character, — but,  "  I  will  be  to  him  a  Father, 
and  he  shall  be  to  me  a  Son."  The  relation 
mentioned  in  the  first  declaration,  as  we 
10 


110  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

have  already  shown,  could  never  have  had 
a  beginning  or  an  end ;  the  duration  of  the 
relation  mentioned  in  the  second,  is  equally 
extensive,  in  regard  to  Christ's  actual  Son- 
ship  ;  but,  in  our  Lord's  mediatorial  charac- 
ter, the  Father  did  ostensively  become  Fa- 
ther, in  the  perceptions  of  men,  because  they 
beheld  that  appearance,  even  our  Lord's  hu- 
man nature,  which,  though  not  the  origin  or 
commencement  of  his  Sonship,  was  the  ori- 
gin or  commencement  of  what  they  visibly 
beheld  as  Sonship.  This  appearance  did  not 
create  his  Sonship ;  but  it  created  his  visible 
appearance  as  Son.  It  did  not  constitute  his 
Sonship  ;  but  it  constituted  the  external,  sen- 
sible display  which  mankind  perceived.  It 
did  not  begin  his  Sonship  ;  but,  with  it,  com- 
menced the  intellectual  and  corporeal  per- 
ception of  Christ's  Sonship.  It  was  not  be- 
gotten as  Son ;  but  it  was  taken  into  union 
by  the  begotten  Son.  It  was  no  addition  to 
his  Sonship ;  but  it  was  an  addition  to  the 
medium  by  which  men  beheld  his  Sonship. 
The  prospective  coming  of  the  human  nature 
did  not  induce  the  Father  to  say,  "  I  will  be 
to  him  a  Father,"  on  account  of  the  creation 
of  that  nature  in  time,  and  its  exhibition  in 
future   ages;    but,   because,  in  future  ages, 


OF    CHRIST.  Ill 

men  would  behold  that  which  was  the  exter- 
nal display  of  Sonship.  This  external  dis- 
play was  future  and  contingent,  and  an  ob- 
ject of  perception  to  men,  as  much  as  the 
heavens  and  all  their  glory  are,  with  respect 
to  God,  future  and  contingent,  and,  with  re- 
spect to  men,  objects  of  perception.  God 
was  powerful  in  the  creation  of  the  heavens ; 
but  that  display  of  power  did  no  more  cause 
the  existence  of  Omnipotence,  than  the  dis- 
play of  the  Sonship  to  men  caused  the  exis- 
tence of  Sonship.  God  says,  "  I  will  get  me 
honour  upon  Pharoah,  and  upon  all  his  host, 
upon  his  chariots  and  upon  his  horsemen." 
But  God  did  not,  thereby,  create  his  honour ; 
neither  was  the  destruction  of  Pharaoh  the 
cause  of  God's  honour.  God  says,  ''  I  will 
be  to  him  a  Father,  and  he  shall  be  to  me  a 
Son ;"  but  he  does  not  say,  I  will  beget  him, 
who  is  Messiah,  my  Son.  He  had  already 
declared,  according  to  the  words  quoted  by 
the  Apostle  from  the  second  Psalm,  that 
Sonship  was  an  inherent,  self-existent,  re- 
lated state,  eternal  as  his  nature.  But,  as 
the  destruction  of  Pharaoh  was  an  external 
display  of  honour  by  him  who  had  eternal 
honour ;  so  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  in 
itst   miraculous   conception  and  preservation, 


112       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIR 

was  an  external  display  of  that  Sonship  which 
was  self-existent  and  eternal.  As  the  Egyp- 
tians were  the  media  by  which  God  manifest- 
ed his  honour,  so  the  human  nature  was  the 
medium  by  which  God  manifested  the  Son- 
ship,  as  eternally  existing  in  the  Divine  na- 
ture, in  its  related  states. 

In  continuation  of  the  proof  of  the  ascen- 
dency of  Christ,  the  Apostle  introduces  ano- 
ther quotation :  "  And  again  ivhen  he  bring- 
eth  in  the  first  begotten  into  the  ivorld,  he 
saith,  And  let  all  the  angels  of  God  worship 
him.^^  Some  render  the  term  Tr^carGTOKov^first- 
born,  instead  of  first-begotten.  Whichever 
reading  we  adopt,  it  is  immaterial  to  the 
Apostle's  reasoning  in  this  passage.  As  there 
is  no  Son  begotten  after  this  Son,  and  as 
none  else  could  be  begotten,  the  phraseo- 
logy is  in  accordance  with  his  being  heir  of 
all  things.  The  first-begotten  and  first-born 
are  the  related  terms  used  by  mankind  for 
that  person  who  is  heir,  or  possesses  the  domi- 
nion and  property.  According  to  the  inter- 
pretation which  is  given  to  the  adverb  TratAiv, 
by  translating  it  the  second  time,,  or  agahi^  a 
different  meaning  is  affixed  to  the  circum- 
stances of  Christ's  superiority  deduced  from 
tlie  quotation,  though  the  Apostle's  reason- 


OF    CHRIST.  113 

ing  remains  unaffected.  When  7r*Aiv  is  tran- 
slated the  second  time,  the  passage  must  be 
read — "  But  when  he  bringeth  again,  i.  e.  the 
second  time,  the  first  begotten  into  the  world, 
he  saith,"  &c.  That  is, — When  God,  by  the 
resurrection,  which  may  be  compared  to  ano- 
ther incarnation,  brought  Christ  a  second 
time  into  the  world,  preparatory  to  his  ascen- 
sion and  glory  in  human  nature,  he  com- 
manded all  the  angels  to  worship  him,  not 
only  in  his  Divine  nature,  but  through  that 
human  nature  which  was  assumed  by  the 
Divine  ;  as  he  saith  in  Psalm  xcvii.  7.  "  Wor- 
ship him,  all  ye  gods,"  i.  e.  angels  of  God. 
In  the  usual  reading,  as  in  our  translation, 
when  TTxKiv  is  rendered  again,  in  the  begin- 
ning of  the  sentence,  it  is,  by  a  transposition 
of  the  Greek  sentence,  joined  to  he  saith,  and 
bears  the  same  sense  as  in  the  foregoing 
verse,  viz.  to  point  out  another  testimony 
concerning  Christ,  referring  to  the  time  of  his 
incarnation,  when  he  came  into  the  world, 
and  when  this  commandment  was  issued  to 
the  angels.  But  there  is  no  evidence  that 
any  such  commandment  was  issued  at  the 
time  of  Christ's  incarnation.  On  the  contra- 
ry, the  Apostle,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Philippi- 
ans,  ii.  8 — 11.  expressly  declares  that  it  was 
10* 


Ill       THE  ETERNAL  30NSHIP 

after  his  death  that  the  angels  were  appomted 
to  worship  Christ,  through  the  medium  of  his 
human  nature.  "  And,  being  found  in  fashion 
as  a  man,  he  humbled  himself,  and  became 
obedient  unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the 
cross.  Wherefore  God  also  hath  highly  ex- 
alted him,  and  given  him  a  name  which  is 
above  every  name :  That  at  the  name  of  Je- 
sus every  knee  should  bow,  of  things  in 
heaven,  and  things  in  earth,  and  things  un- 
der the  earth  ;  and  that  every  tongue  should 
confess,  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the 
glory  of  God  the  Father."  The  translation, 
then,  which  renders  TrocXtv  the  second  time, 
indicating  that  it  was  after  Christ's  resurrec- 
tion or  second  coming  into  the  world,  that 
the  commandment  to  worship  was  given  to 
the  angels, — is  undoubtedly  correct.  As 
mankind  possessed  a  new  medium  by  which 
they  gave  homage  and  worship  to  the  God- 
head, when  Christ  came  in  the  flesh ;  so  the 
angels,  after  his  resurrection,  when  he  en- 
tered heaven  in  his  human  nature,  possessed 
not  a  new  object  of  worship,  but  a  new  7ne- 
dium  by  which  they  might  present  glory  to 
God.  This  adoration  of  the  Son,  in  his  hu- 
man nature,  was  not  adoration  to  a  different 
person,  or  to  another  being,  but  to  that  same 


OF  CHRIST.  ii£; 

being  whom  they  had  worshipped  from  their 
creation,  and  who  now  had  another  appear- 
ance, which  could  be  no  addition  to  his  God- 
head or  personality,  but  which  was  subsist- 
ing in  his  Godhead  and  Divine  personality. 
The  actual  commencement  of  the  worship  of 
mankind  to  God,  in  the  human  nature,  was 
simultaneous  with  his  appearance  on  earth 
after  his  birth  or  first  coming:  the  actual 
commencement  of  the  worship  of  angels  to 
him,  in  the  human  nature,  was  simultaneous 
with  the  appearance  of  the  first  begotten, 
after  his  resurrection  or  second  coming,  when 
he  ascended  up  on  high.  This  human  na- 
ture was  both  the  medium  of  worship  and  that 
which  was  worshipped.  It  was  the  medium  of 
worship,  because  it  indicated  the  Divine  na- 
ture in  which  it  had  subsistence ;  it  was  that 
w^hich  was  worshipped,  because  it  was  in  a 
Divine  person,  and  with  a  Divine  person, 
whose  personality  w^as  not  changed  or  en- 
larged by  its  assumption.  The  medium 
through  which  worship  was  given  was  new, 
and  had  a  beginning ;  that  which  was  wor- 
shipped was  from  everlasting,  for  it  was  not 
to  the  human  nature,  as  human  nature,  that 
homage  was  paid,  but  to  the  human  nature 
united  to  the  Divine,   inhering  in  a  Divine 


116  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

person,  and  insej)arately  connected  with  his 
personality. 

The  Apostle  proceeds  in  his  reasoning: 
"  And  of  the  Angels  he  saith,^^  (quoted  from 
Psalm  civ.  4.)  "  Who  maketh  his  angels  spirits, 
and  his  ministers  aflame  of  fire.  But  unto  the 
Son  he  saith,  Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  for  ever 
and  ever;  a  sceptre  of  righteousness  is  the  scep- 
tre of  thy  kingdom,^^  An  attempt  has  been 
made  to  evade  the  force  of  the  latter  part  of 
this  passage,  evincing  Christ's  Divinity  and 
his  Sonship  in  the  Divine  nature,  by  trans- 
lating it,  God  is  thy  throne,  i.  e.  the  support 
and  glory  of  thy  throne, — and  this,  because 
it  is  affirmed,  that  'o  ko^,  God,  is  in  the  Nomi- 
native case.  But  such  translators  forget  that 
the  Nominative  is  frequently  used  for  the 
Vocative,  by  the  Attics,  the  most  elegant 
and  correct  of  Grecian  writers.  In  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  it  is  frequently  thus  used,  particu- 
larly in  the  Psalms ;  and  St.  Paul  has  adopted 
it  in  Romans  viii.  5.  and  in  the  9th  verse  of 
the  Chapter  which  we  are  now  examining. 
"  Thou  hast  loved  righteousness,  and  hated  ini- 
quity :  therefore  God,  (or  more  explicitly  and 
justly  translated — O  God,)  thy  God  hath 
anointed  thee  tvith  the  oil  of  gladness  above 
thy  felloivs:^'' — meaning,  thereby,  that  in  hu- 


OF    CHRIST.  117 

man  nature  he  was  thus  anointed  above  all  cre- 
ated natures.  These  two  verses,  which  we  are 
examining,  (8,  9,)  are  taken  from  Psalm  xlv. 
6,  7.  Any  comment  must  weaken  the  force 
of  their  application  to  the  Eternal  Sonship  of 
Christ. — Can  sophistry  evade,  can  ingenuity 
distort  the  import  of  this  address  v/hich  deci- 
sively elucidates  the  Eternity  of  our  Lord's 
Sonship  ?  O  God,  ('o  ©go?)  in  the  singular 
number,  is  never  used  absolutely  or  without 
a  restriction  to  some  peculiar  consideration 
of  it,  respecting  any,  except  the  only  true 
God.  God  himself  declares  to  the  Son,  "  O 
God,  thy  throne  is  for  ever  and  ever."  The 
Eternal  God  declares  the  throne  of  his  Son, 
of  his  begotten  Son,  to  be  Eternal. 

The  Apostle  proceeds,-^"  And,  Thou, 
Lord,  in  the  beginning,  hast  laid  the  founda- 
tion of  the  earth ;  and  the  heavens  are  the  ivork 
of  thine  handsJ^"^  The  conjunction  and,  in 
the  beginning  of  the  sentence,  is  introduced 
by  the  Apostle  to  connect  the  foregoing  testi- 
mony with  this  present,  quoted  from  Psalm 
cii.  25.  where  the  conjunction  is  not  found. 
The  passage  is  a  continuation  of  the  testi- 
mony respecting  the  Son.  If  it  do  not  apply 
to  the  Son,  but  to  the  Father,  as  some  affirm, 
the  Apostle  must  have  introduced  into  the 


n8  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

reasoning  a  subject  foreign  to  the  discussion, 
and  totally  unconnected  with  the  argument. 
If  this  declaration  do  not  refer  to  the  Son, 
the  Apostle,  after  having  commenced  a  pro- 
cess to  prove  the  superiority  of  the- Son,  ab- 
ruptly introduces  remarks,  not  only  without 
any  specific  reason,  but  completely  foreign 
from  the  object  which  he  wished  to  prove, 
and  disjointed  from  the  regular  train  of  his 
observations.  But  Paul,  the  generally  re- 
ceived author  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
"  brought  up  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel,  taught 
according  to  the  perfect  manner  of  the  law 
of  the  Fathers,"  could  not,  independently  of 
the  unerring  wisdom  of  the  inspiring  Spirit, 
be  guilty  of  such  a  fallacy,  or  rather  nullity 
of  reasoning.  The  accuracy  of  just  compo- 
sition, the  necessary  connexion  in  the  context, 
and  the  obvious  tendency  of  the  quotation  in 
the  reasoning,  evince  that  the  declaration  is, 
in  this  passage,  applicable  to  the  Son,  and  to 
the  Son  alone. 

"  They  shall  perish^  hut  thou  remainest ; 
and  they  all  shall  wax  old  as  doth  a  garment  ; 
and  as  a  vesture  shalt  thou  fold  them  up,  and 
they  shall  be  changed :  but  thou  art  the  same, 
and  thy  years  shall  not  faiV  The  Son  of 
God,  Vv'ho  is  for  ever  and  ever,  created  the 


OF    CHRIST.  119 

heavens  and  the  earth.  When  they  disappear, 
he  shall  still  remain  the  Son  of  God.  Within 
the  arcana  of  Godhead,  in  the  aspect  of  cre- 
ation, in  the  human  nature  assumed,  he  is 
Son  of  God.  He  rules,  as  Son  of  God,  over 
the  wrecks  of  nations, — the  gradual  decay 
wrought  by  time,  and  the  shock  produced  by 
the  sudden  revolution.  He  rules  over  all, 
God  over  all,  through  the  archives  of  eter- 
nity. 

''  But^  (or  moreover^)  to  which  of  the  angels 
said  he  at  any  time,  Sit  thou  on  my  right  hand, 
until  I  make  thine  enemies-  thy  footstool?''^ 
The  Apostle,  as  he  has  before  repeatedly 
done,  changes  the  nature,  though  not  the 
force,  of  his  proof.  From  the  sources  of  rea- 
soning determining  Christ's  superiority  ob- 
tained from  his  absolute  Godhead,  he  intro- 
duces those  determining  his  superiority  from 
the  glory  of  his  Messiahship.  The  text  is 
taken  from  Psalm  ex.  to  which  Christ  refers, 
when  speaking  to  the  Pharisees,  and  which 
he  adduces,  as  acknowledged  by  the  Jewish 
Doctors  to  have  been  written  concerning  the 
Messiah,  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Spirit. 
The  Mediatorial  character  and  human  na- 
ture of  our  Lord  are  exalted  above  all  created 
beings.     He  is  to  reign,  in  his  human  na- 


120  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

ture,  above  the  greatest  Angel;  in  the  nature 
which  suffered,  he  is  to  triumph ;  in  the  na- 
ture which  was  bruised,  he  is  to  bruise  and 
vanquish  all  his  foes.  Portrayed  as  a  Con- 
queror, according  to  the  Eastern  figure,  his 
enemies  are  to  be  trampled  under  his  feet; 
and  Death  and  Sin  led  captive  at  his  chariot 
wheels. 

Subservient  to  these  victories,  "  Are  they 
not  all,  (the  angels)  ininistering  spirits,  sent 
forth  to  minister  for  them  ivho  shall  be  heirs  of 
salvation  P"  Their  duty,  whilst  they  worship 
the  King,  is  to  minister  to  his  meanest  sub- 
ject. Christ,  therefore,  is  superior  to  all 
angels ; — in  his  Divine  nature,  because  he  is 
Son,  only-begotten  Son,  God  the  Son,  Son 
for  ever  and  ever.  Son  still  the  same,  Son 
whose  years  shall  not  fail; — in  his  human 
nature,  because,  in  consequence  of  its  union 
with  the  Divine,  angels  worship  him,  because 
it  is  raised  to  the  highest  glory,  because  it 
will  triumph  over  all  its  enemies,  and  be- 
cause angels  minister  to  the  subjects  of  Mes- 
siah's kingdom.  The  Son  is,  in  one  word, 
superior  to  all  creatures,  because  he  possesses 
the  qualities  of  the  Godhead,— because  he 
is  Eternal. 


OF   CHRIST.  121 


CHAPTER  VII. 


Continuation  of  the  Examination  of  Passages 
of  Scripture,  which  prove  the  Sonship  of 
Christ  to  be  Eternal. 

We  have,  in  the  former  chapter,  shown 
the  reality  of  Christ's  Sonship  in  the  God- 
head, and  its  eternal,  immense,  and  immuta- 
ble nature.  We  now  pursue  the  investigation 
of  other  passages  of  Scripture,  equally  confir- 
matory of  this  doctrine. 

It  is  written,  Colossians  i.  13 — 20.  "  Who 
(the  Father)  hath  delivered  us  from  the  power 
of  darkness,  and  hath  translated  us  into  the 
kingdom  of  his  dear  Son:  in  whom  ive  have 
redemption  through  his  blood,  even  the  for- 
giveness of  sins :  Who  is  the  image  of  the 
invisible  God,  the  first-born  of  every  creature: 
For  by  him  were  all  things  created  that  are 
in  heaven,  and  that  are  in  earth,  visible  and 
invisible,  whether  they  be  thrones,  or  domi- 
nions, or  principalities,  or  powers  :  all  things 
were  created  by  him,  and  for  him.  And  hejs 
11 


122  THE    ETERiNAL    SONSHIP 

before  all  things,  and  by  him  all  things  consist. 
And  he  is  the  head  of  the  body,  the  church  : 
who  is  the  beginning,  the  first-born  from  the 
dead;  that  in  all  things  he  might  have  the  pre- 
eminence.  For  it  pleased  the  Father,  that  in 
him  should  cdl  fulness  dwell;  And,  (hamig 
made  peace  through  the  blood  of  his  cross,) 
by  him  to  reconcile  all  things  unto  himself,  by 
him,  I  say,  ichether  they  be  things  in  earth  or 
things  in  heaven J^"^ 

The  Apostle,  in  the  verses  above  quoted, 
exhibits  the  nature  of  that  deliverance  which 
had  been  obtained  by  the  believing  Chris- 
tians,— the  condition  from  which  they  had 
been  rescued,  and  that  into  which  they  had 
been  translated.  He  reminds  them  of  the 
darkness  into  which  they  had  been  phmged, 
— that  darkness  which  affected  both  their  in- 
tellect and  moral  feelings, — which  concealed 
from  them  the  glories  of  God's  perfections 
and  government,  and,  above  all,  his  nature,  as 
displayed  in  the  plan  of  salvation.  The  ty- 
ranny or  sway  of  this  darkness  continued  its 
dominion  until  they  were  "  translated  into  the 
kingdom  of  the  Father's  dear  Son,"  where 
they  were  "  made  meet  to  be  partakers  of  the 
inheritance  of  the  saints  in  light."  This 
change  he  terms  a  redemption  procured  by  the 


OF    CHRIST.  123 

blood  of  Christ;  for,  in  the  14th  verse,  the 
words  "  through  his  bloocP  are  an  explication 
of  the  clause  "  in  whom  ,*"  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  ^'forgiveness  of  sins'^'^  is  an  explication 
of  "•  redemption. '^^  There  is  a  propitiation  pro- 
vided, more  effectual  than  the  Levitical  sacri- 
fices. By  his  blood — the  price  of  redemption 
— we  have  obtained  a  complete  discharge  from 
ihe  guilt  of  sin,  and  the  curse  of  the  law; — 
we  have  obtained  an  inheritance  of  all  spiritual 
and  eternal  blessings  which  sin  has  forfeited. 
The  efficacy  of  Christ's  blood,  for  such  glo- 
rious purposes,  arises  from  the  dignity  of  his 
person,  which  gave  virtue  to  his  Mediatorial 
office.  He  who  is  the  head  of  that  kingdom 
into  which  we  are  introduced,  is  the  Son, 
"  who  is  the  image  of  the  invisihle  God.'^ 
These  words  are  peculiarly  forcible,  and  con- 
vey not  only  a  direct  proof  of  Christ's  Divini- 
ty, but  also  of  his  Eternal  Sonship.  This 
image  can  be  no  material  representation;  it 
cannot  be  any  sensible  likeness ;  it  is  not  an 
object  which  men  can  physically  examine; — 
for  it  is  expressly  said  to  be  the  image  of  the 
invisible  God.  This  image  or  likeness  of  the 
invisible  God  is  not,  therefore,  one  which  can 
experience  the  common  casualties  of  human 
nature.     It  cannot  be  born;  for  that  which 


124  THE    ETERNAL    SO?fSHIP 

is  born  is  no  representation  of  an  invisible 
being,  much  less  of  the  invisible  God.  It 
cannot  hunger  and  thirst ;  for  these  proper- 
lies  are  peculiar  to  animated  beings,  who  are 
the  images  of  visible  animated  creatures.  It 
cannot  exhibit  the  external  indications  of  joy 
and  sorrow ;  for  these  are  characteristic  ex- 
pressions of  countenance  or  bodily  gesture, 
belonging  to  sensitive  natures.  It  cannot  die ; 
for  death,  or  the  cessation  of  all  animal  func- 
tions in  the  different  component  parts,  is  pe- 
culiar to  organized  matter — a  visible  sub- 
stance, which  can  never  be  the  image  of  an 
invisible  substance.  It  cannot  possess  length 
or  breadth  or  thickness  ;  it  cannot  have  form 
or  parts;  it  cannot  have  impenetrability,  or 
colour,  or  hardness,  or  softness ;  it  cannot,  in 
fine,  be  matter,  or  any  composition  of  matter. 
Possessing  none  of  these  qualities,  this  image 
cannot  be  human  nature  : — for  all  the  proper- 
ties which  we  have  named,  inseparably  and 
essentially  belong  to  human  nature — which  is 
a  "true  body,"  united  to  a  "reasonable  squI." 
Christ,  in  his  appearance  in  the  flesh,  pos- 
sessed such  human  nature;  he  had  a  "true 
body"  and  a  "  reasonable  soul,"  In  his  hu- 
man nature  he  was  born ;  he  hungered  and 
thirsted;  he  groaned  in  spirit  and  wept;  ho 


OF    CHRIST.  125 

died ;  he  had  length  and  breadth  and  thick- 
ness; he  had  form,  and  hardness  and  softness. 
He  said  to  his  terrified  disciples,  when,  on  ac- 
count of  his  sudden  appearance,  they  thought 
they  had  seen  a  spirit,  "Behold  my  hands 
and  my  feet  that  it  is  I  myself:  handle  me, 
and  see ;  for  a  spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones 
as  ye  see  me  have.  And  when  he  had  thus 
spoken,  he  showed  them  his  hands  and  his 
feet.  And  while  they  yet  believed  not  for  joy 
and  wondered,  he  said  unto  them.  Have  ye 
here  any  meat  ?  And  they  gave  him  a  piece 
of  a  broiled  fish,  and  of  an  honey  comb. 
And  he  took  it  and  did  eat  before  them." 
To  remove  the  unbelief  of  Thomas,  he  said, 
"  Reach  hither  thy  finger,  and  behold  my 
hands  ;  and  reach  hither  thy  hand,  and  thrust 
it  into  my  side :  and  be  not  faithless  but  be- 
lieving." Possessing  such  qualities,  the  hu- 
man nature  of  our  Lord  could  not  be  the 
image  of  the  invisible  Grod,  but  was  the  image 
of  visible  man.  Glorious  and  exalted  as  is 
the  humanity  of  Christ,  it  could  not  possess 
qualities  which  are  a  contradiction  of  its 
existence.  Elevated  in  consequence  of  its 
union  to  Divinity,  it  did  not  become  Divinity, 
nor  did  it  cease  to  be  humanity.  Whilst  it 
is.  and  was,  and  must  be,  possessing  the  at- 
11* 


126  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

tributes  which  are  inherent  in  its  own  nature, 
and  whicli  are  inseparable  from  humanity,  it 
is  impossible  that  it  can  be  the  image  of  any 
being  that  is  invisible,  and,  in  whom,  conse- 
quently, the  properties  of  matter  do  not  in- 
here. It  cannot,  therefore,  be  the  image  of 
the  invisible  God.  John,  whilst  he  and  the 
thousands  of  the  land  of  Judea  beheld  the 
human  nature  of  Christ,  asserts  that  "  No 
man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time ;  the  only 
begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Father,  he  hath  declared  him."  If  the  ex- 
ternal appearance  of  our  Lord's  human  na- 
ture be  the  image  of  God,  then,  the  multi- 
tudes that  surrounded  him  in  his  youth,  who 
were  present  at  his  baptism,  and  who  wit- 
nessed his  public  ministry,  must  have  also 
seen  God;  his  image  or  representation  being 
visible  in  that  human  nature.* 

If  there  be  an  image  or  representation  of 
God  who  is  perfect, — that  image  must  be  like 


*  We  need  scarcely  remark,  that  our  Lord's  declaration,  "  He 
that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father,"  is  no  contradiction  to 
this  reasoning^.  Our  Lord,  in  these  words,  evidently  means  that 
the  existence  of  the  Father  was  as  obvious  as  his  own,  on  account 
of  the  external  works  which  were  performed  by  the  Father  and 
himself,  in  the  Divine  nature ;  and  which  works,  when  perceived 
by  men,  were  manifestations  of  the  Father  and  the  Son.  Our 
Lord  subsequently  cjjplains  himself,  and  shows  that  he  could  not 


OF    CHRIST.  127 

hlin, — must  be  complete  and  perfect, — and 
must  represent  him  as  he  actually  is.  But 
that  which  is  as  God  is,  must  possess  the  sam.e 
qualities;  if,  then,  the  human  nature  of  Christ 
was  the  image  of  God, — God,  in  opposition  to 
the  words  of  John,  was  seen  at  different  times 
by  those  who  beheld  Christ's  appearance  in 
the  flesh.  Christ  says,  "  And  the  Father 
liimself,  which  hath  sent  me,  hath  borne 
witness  of  me.  Ye  have  neither  heard  his 
voice  at  any  time,  nor  seen  his  shape."  Now, 
in  his  human  nature,  Christ  had  shape,  and 
all  the  properties  connected  with  the  posses- 
sion of  shape,  and  this  shape  was  seen  of 


allude  to  perception  of  the  Father  by  external  organs,  when  he 
saysj  ''  Believe  me,  that  I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in 
me  :   or  else  believe  nie  for  the  very  works'  sake." 

It  is  possible  some  may  object  to  our  illustration  of,  and  rea- 
soning from,  the  position  that  the  Son  is  the  image  of  the  invisi- 
ble God,  because,  say  they,  it  is  affirmed  of  man  that  he  was 
'■  created  in  the  image  of  God  ;"  yet  man,  by  being  in  that  image, 
could  not  possess  Divine  perfections,  that  he  might,  thereby,  re- 
present the  Eternal  Being. — We  answer :  that  man,  being  cre- 
ated, could  only  possess  finite  qualities, — that  these  finite  qualities 
of  excellence  did,  to  the  utmost  extent  of  human  nature,  and  as 
far  as  it  was  capable,  represent,  or  gi«e  an  image  of,  God, — that 
the  Son,  as  an  image  of  God,  must,  to  the  utmost  extent  of  his 
nature,  represent  the  invisible  God — and  that  the  Son,  being  a 
Divine  person,  his  representation  must  possess  all  the  qualities  of 
Divinity  ;.  consequently,  being  an  image  of  God  to  the  utmost 
extent  of  his  nature,  he  is  an  eternal  representative.  But,  if  the 
Son  be  an  eternal  representative,  he  is  eternal  Son. 


128       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIF 

men.  If,  therefore,  he  be  the  image  of  the 
Father,  in  his  human  nature,  men  have  seen 
the  shape  of  the  Father ;  which  is  contrary  to 
his  own  express  declaration.  Our  Lord  far- 
ther affirms,  "  Not  that  any  man  hath  seen 
the  Father,  save  he  which  is  of  God,  he  hath 
seen  the  Father."  Christ  is  not,  then,  in  his 
human  nature,  the  image  of  the  invisible 
God.  An  image  is  a  delineation  by  which 
the  being  represented  can  be  recognized, — 
But  God  cannot  be  recognized,  unless  in  the 
possession  of  his  Eternity,  Omniscience,  and 
Omnipotence;  Immensity,  Immutability,  and 
Self-existence.  If  he  be  divested  of  these 
qualities,  there  can  be  no  recognition  of  God- 
head. But  matter,  in  any  shape  or  in  any 
modification,  united  to  human  spirit — to  an- 
gelic nature  or  to  Divinity  itself,  cannot  de- 
lineate these  qualities  of  Deity.  The  hu- 
manity of  Christ  not  only  was  not,  but  never 
can  become,  the  image  of  the  invisible  God. 
In  that  nature  which  c^n  alone  delineate 
the  invisible  God,  he  is  Son ;  for  he  can- 
not delineate  the  Godhead  in  his  humanity. 
Yet  such  delineation  must  be  inherent  in 
him,  and  inseparable  from  him,  and  can 
be  only  found  in  his  Divine  nature.  Now, 
image,  in   Scripture,  denotes  likeness,  and 


OF   CHRIST.  *  129 

even  sameness  of  nature  and  properties.  1 
Corinthians  xv.  49.  "  As  we  have  borne  the 
image  of  the  earthy,  we  shall  also  bear  the 
image  of  the  heavenly."  Hebrews  x.  1. 
''  The  law  having  a  shadow  of  good  things 
to  come,  and  not  the  very  image  of  the 
things."  The  very  image  is  here  opposed  to 
the  bare  features  without  the  substance  and 
properties.  As  the  Son,  therefore,  is  the 
image  of  the  invisible  God,  he  must  possess 
the  qualities  of  Godhead.  Now,  the  God, 
w^ho  is  King  invisible,  is  also  eternal,  immor- 
tal ; — the  Son,  who  is  his  image,  and  who 
delineates  him,  must  be  to  us  invisible,  and 
eternal,  immortal.  The  Son  is,  therefore, 
the  eternal  image  of  the  invisible  God.  Glo- 
rious as  is  the  kingdom  which  he  has  pur- 
chased in  his  humanity,  more  glorious  is  that 
kingdom,  which  is  his,  without  purchase. — 
Exalted  as  is  his  human  nature,  more  exalted 
is  that  Sonship, — that  eternally  related  state 
in  which  he  was  from  everlasting  with  the 
Father.  Could  the  intellect  of  man  pene- 
trate that  veil  which  hides  the  splendours  of 
eternal  duration,  it  would  discover  the  Holy 
Three,  not  only  as  God  absolnte,  but  as  God 
related.  Though  the  Holy  Three  are  invisi- 
ble to  us, — though  sense  cannot  perceive,  or 


130    '    THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

intellect  comprehend  them, — though  the  ta- 
lents of  angel  and  of  man  cannot  developc 
the  profundity  of  that  being  in  whom  all 
things  are, — yet  we  rejoice  that  we  are  ac- 
counted worthy  to  understand,  and  intellec- 
tually to  discern,  that  there  are,  and  must  be, 
eternally  related  states  within  the  Godhead ; 
and  that  he,  who  bore  our  image  in  his  hu- 
man nature,  bears  the  image  of  the  invisible 
Godf  in  his  Divine  nature.  But  this  concen- 
tration of  glories  is  too  much  for  the  human 
intellect.  We  know  that  the  Godhead  exists  ; 
to  gaze  on  its  rays  would  overwhelm  us.  We 
know  that  the  Son  is  eternal ;  how  he  is  Son, 
the  manner  in  which  he  became  Son,  is  an 
extent  of  illumination  which  we  are  not  per- 
mitted to  explore. 

The  Son  is  also  said  to  be  ''  the  first  born 
of  every  creature,^^  or  the  first  born  of  the 
tvhole  creation^  as  the  expression  Trccn^  ana-fcag 
is  translated  in  Romans  viii.  22.  In  the  Arian 
acceptation  of  this  passage,  the  first  born  of 
the  whole  creation  means  the  first  made  creature. 
But  such  a  construction  is  overturned  by  the 
reasoning  adopted  to  prove  the  position.^ — 
When  the  Apostle  affnms  that  the  Son  creat- 
ed all  things,  this  reasoning  does  not  esta- 
blish that  he  is  the  first  made  creature,  unless 


OF    CHRIST.  131 

we  suppose  that  his  power  to  create  arose 
from  his  being  the  first  made  creature.  Such 
a  supposition  is  manifestly  absurd.  Neither 
can  the  creation  of  all  things  by  the  Son  es- 
tablish that  he,  first  of  all,  created  himself. 
Such  are  the  obvious  contradictions  which 
arise  from  the  assertion  that  the  first  born  of 
the  whole  creation  signifies  the  first  made 
creature.  The  expression  first  horn  of  the 
whole  creation,  requires  a  just  comparison  with 
collateral  passages.  It  corresponds  with  the 
declaration  in  Hebrews,  that  the  Son  is  heir 
of  all  things,  and  evidently  implies  a  related 
notion,  because  it  is  connected,  and  associ- 
ated with,  the  related  term  Son.  It  is  em- 
ployed to  designate  the  absolute  Lordship 
or  dominion  of  the  Son  over  all  things.  Its 
use  is  derived  from  the  authority  and  power 
always  conferred  on  the  first  born,  and  uni- 
formly associated,  by  the  Jews,  with  the  idea 
of  the  person  who  was  heir  or  lord  of  all 
things  possessed  by  his  father.  The  sole  cir- 
cumstance of  his  being  first  born  caused  him 
to  inherit  this  extent  of  authority.  The  au- 
thority, when  considered  as  mutually  vested 
in  the  father  and  the  son,  was  the  authority 
of  the  father  and  of  the  first  born.  Thus,  2 
Chronicles  xxi.  3.  '^  But  the  kingdom  gave 


132  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

he  to  Jehoram,    because   he   was  the   first 
born."     The  first  born  was  lord  of  the  rest 
of  the  family,  who  were  his  servants.     This 
is  evident  from  what  Isaac  says  to  Esau,  after 
he  had  conferred  the  right  of  primogeniture 
on  Jacob, — Genesis  xxvii.  37.    "  And  Isaac 
answered  and  said  unto  Esau,  Behold  I  have 
made  him  thy  lord,  and  all  his  brethren  have 
I  given  to  him  for  servants."     Among  the 
Oriental   nations,  first  born,  heir,  and  lord, 
were  synonymous  expressions.     Galatians  iv. 
1.  "Now,  I  say.  That  the  heir,  as  long  as 
he  is  a  child,  differeth  nothing  from  a  ser- 
vant, though  he  be  lord  of  all."   "  Heres  apud 
antiquos  pro  Domino  ponehatur.     The  heir, 
amongst  the  ancients,  was  used  for  the  lordJ^'^^ 
*'  Among  the  children,   the  eldest   son  wa."^ 
"  invested  with  peculiar  privileges,  particu- 
**  larly,  he  had  a  right  to  a  double  portion  of 
"  his  father's  estate,  that  is,  of  all  that  he  was 
"  in  possession  of  when  he  died,  but  not  (as 
*'  Mr.  Selden  shows  to  be  the  opinion  of  the 
"  Jewish  lawyers,)  of  that  which  was  his  in 
"  reversion  after  his  death.     And  this  claim 
'-*  was  so  unalterable,  that  the  father  had  no 
"  power  to  disinherit  him ; "  "  The  Jews 

*  See  Vinnius'  note  on  Justinian's  Instit.  lib.  2.  tit.  19.  last 
section. 


OF    CHRIST.  133 

"  commonly  take  notice  of  three  prerogatives 
"  belonging  to  the  first  born :  a  double  part 
'^  of  the  inheritance,  the  priestiiood,  and  the 
^!  kingdom,  (as  they  speak)  that  is,  the  prin- 

"  cipal  authority  among  his  brethren ;" 

*'  The  first  born  among  the  old  Hebrews 
"  were  eminently  distinguished,  as  it  were, 
*'  by  a  natural  right  from  the  rest  of  the  chil- 
"  dren,  otherwise  it  could  not  have  been  so 
^^  criminal  in  Esau,  to  have  sold  the  preroga- 
"  tive  of  his  birth-right." — LeAvis'  Hebrew 
Antiquities,  vol.  iii. 

The  interpretation  which  renders  the  phrase 
the  first  born  of  every  creature  to  be  Lord  or 
Governor  of  all  things ^  will  be  found  to  be 
the  only  one  which  will  harmonize  with  the 
Apostle's  reasoning.  It  is  in  accordance  with 
the  other  qualities  belonging  to  the  Son,  and 
assimilates  with  his  related  state  of  Son. 
While  the  simple  expression  Lord,  denotes 
his  authority  as  absolute  God,  without  refe- 
rence to  his  related  state  in  the  Godhead  ; — 
the  expression  first  born,  denotes  the  same 
authority,  and  conveys,  in  addition,  the  idea 
that  that  authority  is  exercised  reciprocally 
by  one  person  with  another,  both  existing 
in  related  states,  viz.  those  of  Father  and 
Son.  Authority  and  dominion  are  in  con- 
12 


134       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHII> 

gruity  with  our  ideas  of  Godhead ;  heirship 
or  right  of  primogeniture  are  in  congruity 
with  our  ideas  of  the  related  states  of  Father 
and  Son.  When  the  Son  is  termed  heir,  we 
associate  with  the  designation,  the  objects 
which  he  possesses  and  over  which  he  reigns ; 
— when  he  is  termed  first  horn,  we  associate 
with  the  designation,  the  rights  or  necessary 
privileges  which  he  enjoys,  and,  in  virtue  of 
which,  he  exercises  rule  and  pre-eminence 
over  the  objects  possessed  ;  and  when  the 
person  designated  is  termed  Son,  we  associate 
with  the  expression,  a  related  state  in  which 
this  person  exists  with  another, — who  must 
be  the  Father.  When  he  is  termed  Lord,  we 
associate  the  same  authority  which  he  inherits 
as  Son,  as  heir,  as  first-born, — without  refe- 
rence to  the  related  state  with  which  the  term 
Lord  is  connected.  The  argument  is,  there- 
fore, obvious  and  cogent.  He  is  heir,  first 
born  or  Lord  of  all  things,  because  he  created 
all  things.  The  same  power  which  brought 
them  into  being,  cannot  be  lost  or  diminished, 
when  they  are  in  being. 

If  a  different  explication  be  given  of  the 
expression  Tr^wTSTOJco?  Tracviq  zna-iug,  rendering 
it  the  first  begotten  before  all  creatures, — the 
pre-eminence  of  the  Son  and  his  absolute  om- 


OF    CHRIST.  135 

nipotence  are  unaffected.  We  are  thus  led  to 
view  the  simple  and  underived  related  state 
of  Son,  within  the  Godhead,  independently 
of,  and  before,  creation.  This  latter  explana- 
tion describes  the  eternal  generation  of  the 
Son,  within  the  Divine  essence ;  the  former, 
which  we  have  adopted,  describes  the  Son's 
eternal  omnipotence,  which  was,  and  is,  dis- 
played in  creation,  and  in  the  preservation  of 
creation.  The  one  displays  the  state  of  exis- 
tence inherent  in  the  Deity ;  the  other,  the 
power  which  is  collateral  with  that  state,  and 
predicated  of  the  Son.  '  ^ 

"  For  by  him  ivere  all  things  created  that  are 
in  heaven,  and  that  are  in  earth,  visible  and 
invisible,  whether  they  be  thrones,  or  dominions, 
or  principalities,  or  powers :  all  things  were 
created  by  him,  and  for  him^  The  casual 
particle  'oTi  For,  (or  rather  Because)  in  the 
beginning  of  this  passage,  refers  to  both  parts 
of  the  preceding  verse.  The  Son  is  the  image 
of  the  invisible  God,  as  well  as  the  first  born 
of  the  whole  creation  ;  "  because  by  him  were 
all  things  created,^^  &c.  The  objects  of  crea- 
tion are  described  as  things  in  heaven  and 
things  in  earth,  visible  and  invisible.  The 
things  visible  are  those  in  earth,  the  material 
fabric  of  which,  and  all  that  it  contains,  are 


156       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

said  to  be — Hebrews  xi.  3.  ''  ra>  ^KiTrofAivo:^^ 
things  ivhich  are  seenP  The  things  invisible 
are  affirmed  to  be  in  the  heavens,  and  are  the 
different  ranks  of  angels — thrones^  dominions, 
(or  Lordships,)  principalities,  (or  govern- 
ments,) powers.  In  Ephesians  i.  21.  the 
parallel  terms  mean  the  different  classes  of 
angels  ;  whether  good  or  bad.  In  Colossians 
ii.  10.  the  expression  principality  and  power, 
designates  good  angels,  over  whom  Christ  is 
supreme.  Yet  the  words,  in  the  15th  verse  of 
the  same  chapter,  and  in  Ephesians  vi.  12., 
denote  the  evil  angels,  who  war  against  God 
and  God's  people.  In  Luke  xii.  11.,  they 
signify  earthly  governors: — *'  And  when  they 
bring  you  unto  the  synagogues,  and  unto  ixg 
cc^X^^  xflt*  Tflt?  g|«<r*fl^r,  magistrates  and  powers, 
take  ye  no  thought,"  &c.  These  appellations 
are,  generally,  referable  to  every  object  pos- 
sessing authority,  and  are  here  peculiarly  il- 
lustrative of  the  orders  of  those  invisible  be- 
ings who  are  in  heaven, 

"  All  things  were  created  by  him,  and  for 
him,^^  Some  opponents  of  Christ's  Divinity 
and  Sonship  understand  the  all  things  created 
by  the  Son,  to  mean  the  Gospel  dispensation 
and  Church.  According  to  this  view  of  cre- 
ating all  things,  the  first  born  of  the  whole 


OF    CHRIST.  137 

creation,  in  verse  15th,  signifies  the  first  made 
of  the  Christian  Church.  The  Apostle  is 
made  to  reason  that  the  Son  is  the  first  made 
member  of  the  Christian  Church,  because  by 
him  the  Church  was  created.  But  there  is 
no  justice  in  such  reasoning ;  neither  is  there 
any  necessary  connexion  between  the  creation 
of  the  Church  by  the  Son,  and  himself  being 
its  first  member.  Pierce  says,  of  this  inter- 
pretation, "  It  is  so  forced  and  violent,  that 
"  it  can  hardly  be  thought  men  would  have 
''  espoused  it,  but  for  the  sake  of  an  hypothe- 
"  sis."  Others  contend  that  the  creation  of 
all  things  which  are  in  heaven,  by  the  Son, 
means  the  new-modelling  of  the  heavenly 
hosts.  If  this  statement  mean  that  the  Son, 
after  his  exaltation,  divested  those  angels, 
who  "  ministered  to  the  heirs  of  salvation," 
of  the  situations  which  they  held,  and  placed 
others  in  their  stead, — it  implies  that  those 
angels,  who  were  thus  divested,  had  per- 
formed their  functions  improperly ;- — but  this 
is  expressly  contrary  to  what  is  said  in  the 
epistle  of  Jude,  that  the  angels  who  fell 
"  kept  not  their  first  estate,"  and  that  those 
who  stood,  by  implication,  kept  that  estate. 
If  these  objectors  mean  that  the  Son  changed 
the  order  which  had  formerly  been  established 
12* 


138  THE    ETERNAL    S0N3HIP 

amongst  the  angels,  and  elevated  some,  by 
giving  them  superiority  over  those  to  whom 
they  were  once  inferior,  this  seems  impossi- 
ble, unless  he  also  changed  the  nature  and 
qualities  of  those  who  were  thus  exalted. 
From  the  enumeration  in  this  and  other  pas- 
sages, the  subordination  amongst  the  angels 
seems  to  have  arisen  from  the  qualities  which 
they  possessed.  To  have  changed,  then,  this 
subordination,  by  raising  the  inferior  above 
the  superior  nature,  which  had  done  nothing 
to  cause  such  degradation,  would  be  incon- 
gruous, if  not  unjust.  But,  if  the  Son,  in 
effecting  the  alleged  change,  had  power  to 
give  the  nature  and  qualities  of  an  inferior 
to  a  superior  being, — why  may  he  not  have 
had  the  power  to  create  them  ?  It  will  not 
obviate  the  difficulty  to  say,  that  the  power  of 
changing  a  nature  is  inferior  to  that  of  cre- 
ating it;  unless  it  can  be  shown,  that  the 
power  of  changing  an  angelic  nature  may  be- 
long to  a  inere  man,  as  those,  who  deny  the 
Divinity  of  Christ,  affirm  the  Son  to  be. — 
There  can  be  no  meaning  affixed  to  the  new- 
modelling  of  the  heavenly  beings,  which  will 
not  show  the  superiority  of  him,  in  whom 
such  power  is,  over  all  angelic  natures. — 
Does  not  this  overthrow  the  Socinian  doc- 


OF    CHRIST.  1^39 

trine?  No  legitimate  explanation  can  evade 
the  Apostle's  obvious  assertion  that  the  Son 
created  all  things. 

We  by  no  means  maintain  that  the  view 
which  we  have  combated  is  adopted  by  all 
those  who  deny  the  Eternal  Sonship  of  Christ. 
But,  as  it  is  espoused  by  those  who  endea- 
vour to  overthrow  his  Divinity,  as  well  as  his 
Sonship,  we  felt  it  necessary  to  examine  their 
objections. 

The  mind  cannot  exhaust  the  range  of  ob- 
jects enhancing  the  greatness  of  the  Son. 
Earth  is  full  of  this  greatness.  The  heavenly 
bodies  roll  in  this  greatness.  Angels  enjoy 
their  nature  in  consequence  of  its  exertion. 
The  objects  of  sense  and  the  objects  of  intelli- 
gence are  alike  monuments  of  its  energy.  It 
is  on  earth  ;  because  the  Son  is  there.  It  is 
in  heaven ;  because  the  Son  is  there.  It  is  in 
the  Godhead,  where  the  Son  necessarily  and 
eternally  exists. 

"  And  he  is  before  all  things,  and  by  him 
all  things  consist^  As  the  omnipotence  of 
the  Son  was  displayed  in  creating  all  things, 
he  must  necessarily  have  been  existing  before 
them,  even  as  Son,  eternally,  within  the  God- 
head ;  and  his  power  is  now  conspicuous  in 
maintaining  and  preserving  the  objects  of  ere- 


140  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

ation  when  brought  into  being.  "  By  him  all 
things  consist."  Paul,  when  preaching  on 
Mars'  hill,  declares  that  God  created  all 
things,  and  that,  in  him,  they  now  subsist. 
The  Son,  of  whom  the  same  circumstances 
are  exactly  predicated,  is,  therefore,  absolute 
God.  Acts  xvii.  24—28.  "  God  that  made 
the  world,  and  all  things  therein,  seeing  that 
he  is  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  dwelleth  not 
in  temples  made  with  hands  ;  neither  is  wor- 
shipped with  men's  hands,  as  though  he  need- 
ed any  thing,  seeing  he  giveth  to  all  life,  and 
breath,  and  all  things;  and  hath  made  of 
one  blood  all  nations  of  men,  for  to  dwell  on 
all  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  hath  determined 
the  times  before  appointed,  and  the  bounds 
of  their  habitation ;  that  they  should  seek 
the  Lord,  if  haply  they  might  feel  after  him, 
and  find  him,  though  he  be  not  far  from 
every  one  of  us :  for  in  him  we  live,  and 
move,  and  have  our  being ;  as  certain  also  of 
your  own  poets  have  said,  For  w^e  are  also 
his  offspring." 

If  the  Son  be  before  all  things,  it  is  im- 
possible to  conceive  language  which  more 
specifically  denotes  him  to  be  eternal.  Being 
Son,  before  creation — creation  did  not  cause 
or  produce   his   Sonship.      For  though  the 


OF    CHRIST.  141 

aspect  of  creation  might  have  induced  him 
to  assume  certain  functions,  and  though  he 
prospectively  saw,  from  all  eternity,  the  func- 
tions which  he  would  in  consequence  assume, 
yet,  the  knowledge  of  w^hat  he  would  be  to 
creation,  after  it  came  into  being,  could  not 
have  caused  him  actually  to  exist  in  that 
certain  state  before  creation.  His  actual  ex- 
istence in  any  character  connected  with  cre- 
ation, must  be  simultaneous  with  creation, 
and  not  before  it.  But  his  actual  existence 
as  Son  is  declared  to  be  before  all  creation. 
It  is,  therefore,  independent  of  creation.  If 
it  be  asserted  that  he  was  Son  only  prospec- 
tively from  everlasting,  and  not  de  facto ^  then, 
the  Apostle  has  erred  when  he  says,  "And 
he  (the  Son)  is  before  all  things."  On  the 
supposition  that  the  Son  is  not  ete.iial  Son, 
the  Apostle  has  described  an  actual  state  of 
existence  before  creation,  which  was  not  in 
being  until  creation  had  being;  he  has  de- 
scribed that  as  independent  of  creation,  which 
could  not  be  until  creation  was ;  he  has  given 
to  the  Son  an  indefinitely  eternal  existence, 
whereas  his  existence  as  Son  was  definite 
and  dependent.  If  the  Son  were  not  in  be- 
ing as  Son,  before  creation,  then,  if  creation 
had  never  been,  the  Son  would  have  never 


142       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

been.  Creation,  the  effect,  must,  on  such  a 
supposition,  have  caused  its  creator,  (who 
was  Son  before  the  act  of  creation,)  to  be- 
come Son  in  consequence  of  that  act.  Angels 
and  men  w^ere  created  by  the  Son,  and,  on 
the  supposition  of  a  contingent  Sonship,  they 
were  the  occasion  of  Sonship  to  that  Son 
who  did  create  them.  The  consequent  must 
have  produced  the  antecedent; — but  this  is 
too  preposterous  to  be  maintained.  Yet  such 
conclusions  must  be  deduced,  if  the  Son  be 
not  Son  eternally, — independently  of  crea- 
tion. As  the  Son  was  Son,  independently  of, 
and  before,  all  creation^  when  there  was  no 
Being  but  one  Being,  he  w^as  Son  in  that  Be- 
ing. As  that  Being  is  self-existent,  eternal, 
immense,  and  immutable,  omnipotent,  and 
omniscieiit,  the  Son,  in  himself  as  Son,  pos- 
sesses these  qualities  of  self-existence,  eter- 
nity, immensity,  immutability,  omnipotence, 
and  omniscience. 

The  language  of  nature — the  language  of 
reason — can  give  no  other  construction  to  the 
passage,  than  the  eternal  existence  of  the 
Sonship  of  the  person  described.  Every  ad- 
vance in  this  research  exhibits  the  Sonship  of 
our  Eternal  Lord.  Inanimate  matter  is  his 
creation.     Before  he  formed  the  sterile  moua- 


OF    CHRIST.  143 

tain,  or  the  luxuriant  valley ;  before  he  deck- 
ed the  sky  with  stars,  or  the  earth  with 
flowers;  before  he  gave  the  landscape  its 
hues,  or  the  gale  its  odours — the  heavens 
their  grandeur,  or  the  earth  its  beauty ;  be- 
fore this  world  heard  the  thousand  notes  of 
song,  or  the  other  world  its  ten  thousand 
times  ten  thousand  notes  of  the  "  new  song;" 
before  land  and  sea  and  air ;  before  suns  and 
systems, — he  was  Son.  Before  animated  na- 
ture; before  "  the  cattle  of  a  thousand  hills," 
the  "  fowls  of  the  heaven,"  and  the  "  innu- 
merable creeping  things  of  the  great  and 
wide  sea;"  before  the  generations  of  men 
who  have  appeared,  and  acted,  and  disap- 
peared,— he  was  Son.  Before  the  existence 
of  the  spirit  that  actuates  man;  before  his 
emotions  of  joy  and  sorrow ;  before  his  ener- 
gies that  have  unfolded  science  and  develop- 
ed art ;  before  his  might  which  has  displayed 
itself  in  the  loneliness  of  its  own  inherent 
strength,  and  in  the  tumult  of  falling  na- 
tions, and  of  rising  states ;  before  he  enjoyed 
communion  with  his  creator ;  before  he  sin- 
ned and  maddened  in  crime ;  before  life  and 
immortality  were  brought  to  light, — in  life 
and  immortality  the  Son  was.  Before  angels' 
intellect  desired  to  look  into  the  "  things  of 


IM  THE    ETERNAL    SON  SHIP 

God ;"  before  their  armies  fell,  or  their  ar- 
mies remained  faithful ;  before  they  obeyed 
commands,  or  ranged  through  space;  before 
thrones,  or  dominions,  or  principalities,  or 
powers — the  Son  was.  In  the  Godhead  he 
was,  and  is,  and  shall  be,  evermore. 

«'  And  he  is  the  head  of  the  body,  the 
church :  ivho  is  the  beginning,  the  first  born 
from  the  dead;  that  in  all  things  he  might 
have  the  pre-eminencey 

The  Apostle  has  enumerated  the  qualities, 
and  specified  the  excellence,  of  the  Son,  in 
that  nature  which  is  essentially  hisj  even  in 
"  eternal  power  and  Godhead ;"  he  now  de- 
tails the  grandeur  of  his  Messiahship,  and 
the  glories  of  his.  Mediatorial  reign.  The 
transition  which  the  Apostle  commences  in 
the  13th,  and  continues  to  the  end  of  the 
19th  verse,  is  employed  in  descriptions  of 
the  uncreated  glories  of  the  Son,  and  his 
achieved  glories  as  the  Messiah.  As  Mes- 
siah, "  he  is  head  of  the  body,  the  Church." 
In  the  union  of  the  Son  with  humanity,  he 
rules  pre-eminently  over  that  church  which 
he  has  founded,  constituted,  and  preserved. 
The  Son,  as  God,  is  supreme  over  creation, 
and,  as  Mediator,  he  is,  especially  and  pe- 
culiarly, supreme  over  the  church.     As  the 


OF    CHRIST.  145 

head  is  elevated  above  all  the  other  members 
of  the  body,  so  he  is  elevated  over  all  the 
members  of  the  church,  his  mystical  body. 

''  Who  is  the  beginning  'o?  «5^*v  oc^x^,^^  I" 
this,  and  in  what  follows,  the  majesty  of  the 
vSon,  as  the  efficient  cause  and  presiding  head 
of  the  Church,  is  exhibited  in  consequence 
of  that  fulness  Avhich  it  pleased  the  Father 
should  dwell  in  him.  The  term  <x^;^tj,  ren- 
dered beginning,  was  the  one  employed  by 
the  Greek  Theist  Philosophers,  to  designate 
the  unmade,  self-existent  Deity,  the  Uncaused 
Cause  of  all.  Thus  Proclus,  speaking  of  Pla- 
to's opinion  concerning  the  efficient  principle  or 
cause,  says,  'oti  'o  IIKoctuv  iiti  fxiccv  a^x^^  ocv^yn 
rrocvToi^ — that  Plato  reduces  all  things  to  one 
principle,  i.  e.  one  self-subsistent  Being,  whose 
self-subsistence  Plato  describes  as  before  all 
other  beings.  This  was  the  notion  associated 
with  the  word  a^^x^i  by  the  Greek  Theists, 
in  opposition  to  the  reasonings  of  the  Atheis- 
tical Philosophers.^  In  accordance  with  that 
which  was  the  grand  object  of  examination  in 
the  Greek  Schools  of  Philosophy,  Christ  calls 
himself,  (Revelation  iii.  14.)  '*i  oe.^x*i  '^^^  ^-vKritag 
ra  Qia — the  beginning,  i.  e.  the  self  existent, 

"  See  Cuthvorth's  Intellectual  System,  p.  243,  axidi  passim. 

13 


146  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

efficiefit  cause  of  the  creation  of  God,  In  his 
human  nature,  this  is  impossible.  It  is  true  in 
that  nature  which  is  Almighty  and  liveth  for 
ever.  It  is  true  of  the  Son,  who  in  the  ever- 
lasting nature,  created  all  things.  The  re- 
search of  ancient  sages,  of  Pythagoras,  Plato, 
and  Aristotle,  was  employed  in  quest  of  that 
principle  which  brought  all  things  into  being; 
this  principle  they  justly  considered  underived 
and  self-existent.  The  Apostle  declares  that 
this  efficient,  self-existent  principle  is  the  Son. 
For  he  says  that  the  Son  created  all  things, 
visible  and  invisible.  The  Son  is,  therefore, 
the  o^^x*i — ^he  heginning,  or  efficient  principle 
by  which  all  things  were  created.  The  Son 
himself,  adopting  (if  we  dare  use  the  expres- 
sion,) not  only  the  notion  employed  by  the 
Greek  Philosophers,  but  the  very  word  em- 
ployed to  express  that  notion,  says, — I  am 
''vi  (x^x*J  "^^^  JCTifl-go)?  T«  ©£^,  the  heginning,  the 
ffficient  cause  of  the  creation  of  God  Though 
the  Son  be  thus  the  a^x^,  or  beginning  or  ef- 
ficient cause  of  all  things,  he  is,  in  the  pas- 
sage which  we  are  examining,  considered  as 
the  o^^x*^,  the  beginning  or  efficient  cause,  with 
respect  to  restricted  objects  in  creation.  The 
Apostle  has  introduced  the  Son  in  his  Mes- 
siahship,  as  head  of  the  Church,  and  the  qua- 


OF    CHRIST.  147 

lities  subsequently  enumerated  must  be  con- 
fined to  him  in  that  capacity.  The  excellence 
of  his  supreme  authority  in  the  Church,  is  the 
object  of  the  Apostle's  examination.  He  is, 
then,  the  efficient  cause,  the  creator,  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Church ;  but  not  as  creatures 
can  be  termed,  in  one  sense,  the  beginning  of 
parts  of  the  Church.  For  they  themselves 
have  a  beginning  within  it,  but  are  not  the 
beginning  of  it.  They  are  employed  as  in- 
struments by  the  efficient  cause  of  the  Church, 
but  are  not  themselves  efficient  causes  in  pro- 
moting its  extension.  They  are  caused  to  he 
by  him,  who  is  the  cause  of  being  in  the 
Church.  They  are  media,  having  all  their 
power  derived.  The  Son  is  the  underived 
original  of  the  Church,  and  all  in  that  Church 
originate  with,  and  are  derived  from,  him. 
But  if  the  declaration  that  the  Son  is  the 
^^X^-)  ^^^6  beginnijig  or  efficient  cause,  which 
he  must  be,  seeing  he  created  all  things, — 
prove  his  eternal  Godhead  as  Son,  the  decla- 
ration that  he  is  the  a^x^,  the  beginning  or 
efficient  cause  of  the  Church,  likewise  proves 
his  eternal  Godhead  as  Son.  For  what  is 
true  in  consequence  of  his  being  the  cause  of 
creation  as  a  whole,  is  also  true  in  conse- 
quence of  his  being  the  cause  of  the  different 


148       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

and  respective   portions  of  existence   which 
compose  creation.      One  of  the  portions  of 
creation  is  the  Church ;  the  cause  which  pro- 
duced it  must  be  as  really  God,  as  the  cause 
which  produced  the  orders  of  spirit  or  the 
orbs  of  matter.     An  efficient  cause  must  be 
as  much  employed  to  give  being  to  this  por- 
tion as  to  any  other  portion,  or  all  the  por- 
tions of  creation.     The  pow  er  of  the  Son,  in 
causing  this  Church,  is  as  much  the  power  of 
his  eternal  Godhead,  as  his  powder  in  causing 
the  other  parts  of  creation.      The  omnipo- 
tence, wdiich  first  called  all  things  into  being, 
must  be  underived,    when  exhibited    in   the 
minutest  particle  —  in   the   existence  of  the 
church,  or  in  the  existence  of  all  things ; — 
otherwise  the  objects,  whether  great  or  small 
portions  of  creation,  would  be  derived  from 
some  other  omnipotence  which  is  not  in  the 
Son.     But  there  cannot  be  two  omnipotent 
Beings.     This  omnipotence  of  the  underived 
cause  of  the  Church  is  not  only  exerted  in 
producing  all  its  members,  but  in  producing 
the    most   resplendent   and   glorious   display 
within  it.    It  has  created  that  object  in  which 
are  concentrated  all  the  perfections  of  God 
— that  object  even  more  illustrious  than  the 
brightest  seraph  who  never  suffered  wo  or 


OF   CHRIST.  149 

degradation  in  consequence  of  sin — that  ob- 
ject, the  medium  before  which  "  the  things 
in  heaven  and  the  things  in  earth"  bow — that 
object,  before  which  the  angels,  the  living 
creatures,  and  elders,  "  cast  their  crowns" 
—  that  object  which  not  only  "  lives  and 
moves  and  has  its  being"  by  the  supporting 
Godhead,  but  is  united  with  it,  being  elevated 
to  personal  existence  with  that  person  who 
is  the  eternal,  efficient  cause  of  all  things. 
This  object,  which  is  the  human  nature  of 
the  first  cause,  is,  in  like  manner  with  all 
beings  in  the  Church,  caused  by  the  Son, 
and  the  other  two  Divine  persons.  Its  cau- 
sation and  assumption  could  not  produce,  or 
give  Sonship  to,  its  own  efficient  principle, 
which  is  the  Son.  The  formation  of  the 
Church  is  expressly  called  a  creation,  and  its 
members  are  said  to  be  "  created  in  Christ 
Jesus  unto  good  works."  The  Son  declares 
that  all  the  members  of  the  Church  must  be 
born  again  ;  a  new  creation  must  take  place 
in  their  natures,  directed  by  a  power  as  potent 
as  the  first  creating  energy.  Though,  in 
God,  there  can,  strictly,  be  no  degrees  of 
omnipotence ;  yet,  in  our  views  of  compre- 
hension, this  is  a  more  powerful  exhibition, 
because  it  is  an  energy  to  controul  and  renew 
13* 


160       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

active,  vigorous  powers,  which  are  opposed 
to  the  will  of  the  Creator ;  whereas,  in  the 
first  process  of  creation,  they  were  simply 
called  into  existence,  not  created  anew  and 
re-modelled.  The  Son  is  the  efficient  cause  of 
the  Church ; — none  could  be  such  an  efficient 
cause,  except  the  Eternal  Being ; — the  Son 
is,  therefore.  Eternal, — the  cause  of  creation 
— the  cause  of  that  portion  of  creation  which 
is  the  Church. 

The  Son  is  "  tt^wtotoxo?  g)t  twv  vsx^wv,  the 
first  borfi  from  the  dead ; — that  in  all  things 
he  might  have  the  pre-eminence.'^^ 

This  passage  has  been  much  disputed,  and 
no  little  ingenuity  has  been  employed  in 
endeavouring  to  ascertain  the  exact  mean- 
ing of  the  Apostle.^  Some  understand  his 
meaning  to  be  that  the  Son,  in  human  na- 
ture, w^as  the  first  that  arose  from  the  dead, 
to  immortal  life,  and  that,  being  the  "  first 
fruits  of  them  that  slept,"  he  arose  by  his 
own  inherent  power.  In  proof  of  this  opinion, 
it  is  asserted  that  those,  who  were  raised 
from  the  dead  by  Elijah,  Elisha,  and  by 
Christ,  died  again,  and  that,  consequently, 
their  resurrection  was  not  to  immortal  life,— 
that  those  saints  who  arose  and  went  into  the 
holy  city,  consequent  on  Christ's  death,  did 


OF   CHRIST.  151 

not  do  so  until  after  his  resurrection.  (See 
Matthew  xxvii.  53,)  From  the  circumstance 
of  Christ  being  the  first  of  the  church  who 
arose  to  immortal  life,  they  say  he  is  styled 
the  Jirst  born  of,  or  from,  the  dead,  that,  in 
the  resurrection,  and  "  in  all  things"  in  the 
church,  "  he  might  have  the  pre-eminence" 
or  priority  of  all  creatures, — a  pre-eminence 
more  especial  m  as  much  as  he  arose  by  his 
own  power,  through  which  all  other  creatures 
are  to  arise.  But  if  there  be  any  pre-emi- 
nence connected  with  the  circumstance  of 
being  the  first  raised  from  the  dead,  surely 
there  must  also  be  pre-eminence  connected 
with  the  circumstance  of  being  altogether 
prevented  from  experiencing  the  power  of 
death ;  yet  we  are  not  aware  of  any  peculiar 
honours  derived  by  Enoch  and  Elijah,  in 
consequence  of  their  immediate  translation 
from  earth  to  heaven.  Neither  do  we  read 
of  any  especial  privileges  or  pre-eminence  en- 
joyed by  those  saints,  who  were  the  first 
members  of  the  church,  delivered  from  death, 
after  Christ's  resurrection.  Nor  can  we  see, 
in  what  manner,  the  mere  circumstance  of 
the  Son's  resurrection  in  human  nature,  as 
the  first  who  triumphed  over  death  in  his 
own  might,  could,  of  itself,  exhibit  pre-emi- 


132  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

nence  over  the  Church.  In  itself,  it  is  merely 
a  fact,  which,  unless  associated  with  other 
considerations  deduced  from,  and  associated 
with,  the  event,  does  not  evince  superiority. 
Had  the  additional  fact  been  stated,  that  he 
arose  by  his  own  inherent  strength,  this  would, 
doubtless,  have  been  an  argument  showing 
his  pre-eminence  or  greatness;  but  as  this 
fact  is  not  adduced  in  the  passage,  the  Apos- 
tle's reasoning  can  only  be  collected  from 
what  he  has  expressly  mentioned. 

To  obviate  these  difficulties,  another  ex- 
planation has  been  given  to  the  exjiression, 
viz.  that  the  Son  is  Lord  of  the  dead;  and 
this,  we  apprehend,  is  the  true  meaning.  The 
particle  ex  is  very  often  used  as  the  sign  of 
the  Genitive  case,  and  may  be  translated  of 
as  well  ^sfrom. 

We  have  already  shown,  from  the  Jewish 
customs,  and  the  expressions  of  Scripture, 
that  the  word  tt ^ otT or oaog,  literally  ^r5^  horn,  is, 
also,  from  uniform  association,  employed  to 
signify  lord  or  ruler,  because  the  first  born 
was  lord  of  the  rest  of  the  family.  In  an- 
nouncing the  Son  to  be  the  Lord  of  the  dead, 
the  Apostle  preserves  his  reasoning  entire. 
He  continues  the  description  of  the  Son's 
pre-eminent  qualities  in  the  Church,  having 


OF    CHRIST.  153 

already  described  him  as  the  efficient  cause, 
the  beginning  from  which  the  Church  came, 
— and  he  farther  asserts  his  supremacy  by 
his  Lordship  over  the  dead,  instead  of  men- 
tioning the  insulated  fact  that  the  Son  first 
arose  from  the  dead.  In  confirmation  of  the 
reading  which  we  have  adopted,  see  Romans 
xiv.  9.  "  For  to  this  end  Christ  both  died, 
and  rose,  and  revived,  that  he  might  be  Lord 
both  of  the  dead  and  living."  As  the  first 
born  bears  the  same  signification  as  lord,  we 
discover,  in  this  explication  of  the  passage, 
the  pre-eminence  that  the  Son  especially  pos- 
sesses in  his  universal  reign,  which  compre* 
hends  both  "  the  quick  and  the  dead." — The 
apostle  John  exhibits  the  splendours  of  Christ's 
exaltation,  and  expressly  attaches  this  ex- 
pression to  the  sway  which  he  exercises  over 
all  human  greatness : — he  says  that  the  Son 
is  prince  of  the  kings  of  the  earth,  and  makes 
the  expression  Tr^caroroKog  6>c  twv  vg;c^«v,  the  first 
born,  (or  first  begotten^  as  it  is  translated  in 
the  Revelation,)  to  precede  the  declaration  of 
his  earthly  rule.  The  Son  is,  therefore,  the 
Lord  who  rules  over  the  dead  and  over  death 
itself. 

The  human  race  experience  the  sway  of 
this  principle,  which  has  been  boldly  termed 


154       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

a  tyrant — "  the  king  of  terrors,"  until  the 
"  stronger"  king  shall  **  bind  him"  and  divest 
him  of  his  reign.  The  Son  is  Lord  of  the 
dead,  for  he  has  appointed  the  season  in 
which  death  shall  prevail  over  man,  and  the 
season  when  it  shall  cease.  He  has  ordained 
the  time  when  he  shall  destroy  death  itself. 
The  Son  reigns  over  those  of  his  Church  who 
are  alive,  and  over  those  who  are  dead.  He 
reigns  over  life  and  over  death,  that  in  all  re- 
spects, in  his  mediatory  functions,  he  may  be 
pre-eminent. 

The  pre-eminence  of  the  Son  in  the  Church, 
arises  from  what  he  is  in  himself,  being  its 
source, — and  from  the  objects  within  it  which 
he  rules. 

"  For  it  pleased  the  Father  that  in  him 
should  all  fulness  dwell;  tt^v  to  TrAtj^eaiJboc  Ka- 
zotKi^cxi — all  fulness  should  divelV  Before 
examining  what  this  TrAyj^oofjLx,  pleroma,  ful- 
7iess,  which  dwells  in  the  Son,  is,  we  shall 
endeavour  to  ascertain  its  connexion  and 
meaning  in  other  passages  of  Scripture. 

riAjj^oj^ot,  fulness,  signifies  that  which  is 
complete  in  itself,  and  which  also  renders 
another  object  complete.  —  It  is  especially 
used,  in  this  sense,  to  signify  the  conversion 
of  the  Jews,  which  \\  ill  render  them  complete 


OF    CHRIST.  155 

in  the  privileges  of  which  they  have  been 
almost  entirely  deprived.  It  signifies,  like- 
wise, the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles,  which 
will  render  them  complete  in  those  privileges 
which  they  so  partially  enjoy  by  the  light  of 
nature; — each  of  which  conversions,  com- 
plete in  itself,  will  render  the  other  complete  ; 
and  both  united,  will  constitute  the  com- 
pletion of  the  universal  Church.  This  idea 
oi fulness  or  comjjletion  is  taken  from  a  patch, 
Avhich,  when  put  into  a  torn  garment,  mends 
it,  or  makes  it  complete.  See  Matthew  ix. 
16.  where,  in  this  sense,  it  is  called  7rA>j^ftjjuot, 
that  which  is  put  in  to  Jill  up— fulness, — 
The  conversion  of  the  Jews  to  the  Chris- 
tian Church  is,  in  Romans  xi.  12.  called  to 
7rA»j^a)^oj  tftuTOJv,  their  fulness.  "  Now  if  the 
fall  of  them  be  the  riches  of  the  world,  and 
the  diminishing  of  them  the  riches  of  the 
Gentiles :  how  much  more  their  fulness  ?" 
Their  own  conversion  is  that,  which  commu- 
nicated or  infused  into  them,  renders  them 
complete  or  full ;  and  their  conversion  is,  to 
the  rest  of  the  world  and  to  the  Gentiles,  the 
completion  or  fulness  of  riches  in  the  church. 
The  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  is,  in  like 
manner,  called  to  7rA»j^wu<»,  the  fulness.  Ro- 
mans xi.  25.  "  For  I  would  not,  brethren,  that 


156  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

ye  should  be  ignorant  of  this  mystery,  lest  ye 
should  be  wise  in  your  own  conceits ;  that 
blindness  in  part  is  happened  to  Israel,  until 
the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in."  The 
Christian  Church  is  represented  as  a  great 
temple,  in  which  all  nations  are  to  worship  ; 
the  Gentiles  are  represented  as  successively 
entering  it,  and,  when  they  shall  have  gone 
in,  their  general  entrance  is  termed  TrAj^^w^ct, 
fulness  or  completion  to  themselves.  On  this 
event,  the  Jews,  who  have  been  blinded,  and 
unable  to  see  the  beauty  of  the  Christian  tem- 
ple, or  the  way  of  approach  within  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  will  likewise  enter,  being  ena- 
bled to  see  clearly  the  advantageous  nature  of 
its  worship. 

The  Church  universal  is  termed  the  ful- 
ness or  completion  of  Christ,  in  his  Mediato- 
rial functions ;  as  that,  without  which,  his 
Messiahship  would  be  incomplete  ; — without 
which,  we  could  form  no  notion  of  him  as 
Messiah.  This  Church  is  to  him  a  fulness, 
a  completion;  he  sees  it  as  "the  travail  of 
his  soul,  and  is  satisfied,"  "  with  great  desire 
he  has  desired"  to  accomplish  its  union  to 
himself  by  his  sufferings  and  victories. — 
Ephesians  i.  22,  23.  "  And  hath  put  all  things 
under  his  feet,  and  gave  him  to  be  the  head 


OF   CHRIST.  157 

over  all  things  to  the  Church,  which  is  his 
body,  the  fulness,  to  7rA»j^«^ot,  of  him  that 
filleth  all  in  all."  Christ,  in  his  mediatorial 
character  as  Messiah,  has  universal  rule  :  "all 
things"  are  ''  put  in  subjection  under  his 
feet ;"  his  enemies  are  to  be  made  his  foot- 
stool ;  angels  and  men  are  under  his  sway ; 
evil  spirits  are  under  his  controul ;  and  the 
material  worlds,  with  all  which  they  contain, 
are  under  his  direction :— but  this  universal 
reign  would  be  incomplete,  unless  his  especial 
subjects,  the  universal  Church  among  men, 
were  also  united  and  subjected  to  him.  This 
is  his  mystical  body,  and  is  as  necessary  to 
him,  as  the  rest  of  the  members,  in  the  corpo- 
real frame,  are  to  the  head.  His  powers,  as 
Messiah,  would  be  incomplete,  unless  this  spi- 
ritual power  were  also  his; — his  kingdom 
would  be  incomplete,  if  this  portion,  which  is 
his  spiritual  kingdom,  were  not  given  to  him ; 
— there  would  be  a  deficiency  of  subjects, 
unless  he  procured  his  spiritual  subjects. 

This  fulness  is  also  considered  as  the  graces 
and  mercies  which  are  treasured  up  in  Christ, 
to  be  communicated  by  him  to  each  mem- 
ber of  his  Church;  and  without  which  in- 
dwelling presence  of  Christ,  by  the  fulness 
of  grace  and  mercy,  the  individual  mem- 
14 


158       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

bers  of  the  Church  would  not  be  complete. 
The  fulness  of  these  graces  and  mercies 
dwells  in  Christ  as  their  source;  they  dwell 
in  the  members  of  his  church,  who  are  their 
recipients  from  Christ.  Every  member  of 
Christ's  mystical  body  obtains  this  effusion 
of  fulness.  The  Valentinians,  one  of  the 
sects  of  the  Gnostics,  affirmed  that  they, 
being  the  only  chosen  and  spiritual  seed  of 
heaven,  would,  after  this  life,  approach  the 
Divine  pleroma  or  fulness,  which  they  termed 
the  habitation  of  the  Deity ;  whilst  all  others, 
having  only  partial  favour,  would  be  unable 
to  reach  that  elevation.  In  opposition  to 
such  opinions,  the  apostle  John  says  that 
the  real  pleroma  of  the  Church  is  Christ's 
grace,  which  is  not  given  to  any  one  more 
than  another,  but  is  communicated  to  all 
the' members.  John  i.  16.  "And  of  his  ful- 
ness (TrKvi^uiAtx)  have  all  we  received,  and  grace 
for  grace."  This  fulness  is  said  to  dwell  in 
the  Church,  and  in  each  member  thereof,  be- 
ing Christ's  temple; — as  the  Sheckinah  or 
visible  glory  of  Jehovah  dwelt  in  the  Ark 
and  Temple  of  the  Jewish  Church.  It  di- 
rects the  worship,  enlightens  the  understand- 
ing, warms  the  affections,  elevates  the  soul ; — 
and  Christ,  by  this  fulness,  is,  indeed,   God 


OF    CHRIST. 


159 


u'ith  us.      Some  shining  grace,  particularly 
the  superior  one  of  love  comprehending  all 
the  rest,  is  denoted  by  this  fulness.     Ephe- 
sians  iii.  17 — 19.  "That  Christ  may  dwell 
in  your  hearts  by  faith ;  that  ye,  being  rooted 
and  grounded  in  love,  may  be  able  to  com- 
prehend with  all  saints,  what  is  the  breadth, 
and  length,  and  depth,  and  height;    and  to 
know  the  love  of  Christ,  which  passeth  know- 
ledge, that  ye   might  be  filled  with  all  the 
fulness  (TThyj^ufAx)  of  God."     The  people  of 
the  Messiah  are  formed  into  a  holy  temple, 
for   an   habitation   of    God,    by   the   Spirit, 
through   the   love   of  Christ;    and,    in   this 
temple,  Christ  displays  the  fulness  of  grace 
and  mercy  which  he  possesses.     This  fulness 
is  said  to  be  laid  up  in  Christ,  w^ho  dispenses 
it  to  his  people;    for  it  is  written,  Ephesians 
i.  23.  "  That  he  filleth  all  in  all ;"  t^  ttccvtx  iv 
TToio-i    TTKyj^afXivs — and    Ephesians   iv.    8 — 10. 
"  Wherefore  he  saith,  AVhen  he  ascended  up 
on  high,  he  led  captivity  captive,  and  gave 
gifts  unto   men.      (Now   that   he  ascended, 
what  is  it  but  that  he  also  descended   first 
into  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth  ?     He  that 
descended  is  the  same  also  that  ascended  up 
far  above  all  heavens,  that  he  might  fill  (ivoc 
^Ar,^co<ryi)  all  things.")     Without  this  fulness 


J 60  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

in  the  Messiah,  his  character  would  not  be 
complete.  The  graces  and  mercies,  which 
are  the  blessings  that  he  confers,  are  said  to 
be  in  the  members  of  his  Church,  being  their 
fulness  derived  from  the  inexhaustible  source 
which  is  in  Christ.  Without  these  blessings 
bestowed  on  them,  they  would  be  incomplete 
in  the  Church  of  the  Messiah.  Romans  xv. 
29.  "  And  I  am  sure  that,  when  I  come  unto 
you,  I  shall  come  in  the  fulness  (7rA>j^&)ju<jt)  of 
the  blessing  of  the  gospel  of  Christ."  ' 

These  observations  are  necessary  as  a  pre- 
liminary discussion,  in  ascertaining  the  mean- 
ing of  7rAy}^M[A(x>,  fulness,  in  the  verse  immedi- 
ately under  consideration. — We  have  shown 
that  the  foundation  of  the  Church  by  Christ,  its 
efficient  cause,  is  a  peculiar  and  incommuni- 
cable attribute  of  Deity,  who  is  the  a^x*^,  the 
heginning  or  efficient  cause  of  all  things.  As 
a  proof  that  the  attributes  mentioned  in  the 
preceding  verse,  i.  e.  being  the  efficient  cause 
of  the  Church,  and  having  rule  over  the  dead, 
are  in  Christ,  the  Apostle  connects  these  at- 
tributes with  what  he  at  present  predicates, 
by  the  particle  *ot<,  for  or  because  it  pleased 
the  Father,  that  in  him  all  fulness  (-rKi^^eafxa) 
should  dwell.  What  fulness  or  pleroma  is 
this  which  does  dwell  in  the  Son  ?    Is  it  his 


OF    CHRIST.  161 

Church?  or  is  it  the  revenue  of  graces  and 
mercies  which  he  bestows  on  the  Church? 
We  apprehend  that  neither  of  these  is  the 
object  alluded  to,  and,  in  order  to  obtain  the 
Apostle's  exact  meaning,  we  shall  examine 
the  parallel  passage  in  Colossians  ii.  9.  where 
it  is  said  of  Christ,  "  For  in  him  dwelleth  all 
the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily- — Trciv  to 
ttKvj^o^ol  TJJ5-  9'goT;^To?  <rw^5tT/)tw?."  The  expres- 
sion is  here  entirely  different  from  any  other 
meaning  of  TrAfi^cafjLoc,  fulness,  and  conveys  an 
idea  far  beyond  any  to  which  we  have  alluded. 
The  following  observations  will  lead  to  the 
opinion  which,  we  apprehend,  the  Apostle  in- 
tended to  convey.  The  word  TrKyj^co^oL  is  de- 
rived from  7rA>;^>j#^  signifying  not  only  full,  but 
finished,  perfect,  complete;  that  ivhich  ivants 
nothing  ivhich  it  ought  to  have.  Hence,  1 
Corinthians  X.  26.  7rhYi^u)iJi,ot,Tv\g  yv^g,  the  fulness 
of  the  earth,  means  all  that  the  earth  contains 
— all  that  belongs  to  it.  The  Gnostics,  whose 
doctrines  were  circulated  among  professing 
Christians  as  early  as  the  apostolic  age,  main- 
tained, amongst  other  opinions,  that  the  world 
was  created  by  an  evil  principle,  and  that  all 
matter  was  essentially  evil ; — that  there  was  a 
pleroma  or  fulness  in  the  Deity,  consisting  of 
different  iEons  or  emanations  which  he  gene- 
14* 


162  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

rated,  in  which  he  dwelt,  and  which  were 
subordinate  to  him ; — that  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God,  was  one  of  these  J^ons  who  descended 
into  the  body  of  Jesus,  and  who,  when  that 
body  suffered,  left  it  and  returned  to  his  own 
plero7na ; — and  that  his  object,  in  this  descent, 
was  to  effect  the  overthrow  of  evil  and  of  mat- 
ter, which  he  will  finally  accomplish.  These 
notions  were  deduced  from  the  Oriental  phi- 
losophy maintaining  the  existence  of  two  inde- 
pendent principles — the  one  good  and  the  other 
evil.  These  doctrines  were  principally  preva- 
lent amongst  the  Churches  of  Asia,  which, 
therefore,  the  Apostle  was  particularly  anxious 
to  guard  against  such  dangerous  heresies.  He 
declares  that  in  Christ  dwelt  all  the  fulness  of 
the  Godhead  bodily.  Now  the  Godhead  ex- 
pressly means  that  nature  which  is  God's, — 
that  in  which  God  is  what  he  is.  It  is  thus 
used  by  the  Apostle,  Romans  i.  20.  "  For 
the  invisible  things  of  him  from  the  creation 
of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  under- 
stood by  the  things  that  are  made,  even  his 
eternal  power  and  Godhead."  Now,  that 
which  is  inseparable  from  the  Godhead, — 
that  which  it  cannot  Avant  to  be  what  it  is,— 
that  which  it  must  possess  to  be  Godhead, — 
is  its  essential  perfections,  and  the   govern- 


OF    CHRIST.  1G3 

ment  of  what  it  has  created.  These  are 
united,  not  only  with  our  notions  of  God- 
head, but  witli  the  existence  of  Godhead 
itself.  Without  these  there  would  be  no 
Godhead.  They  are,  therefore,  its  ttAvj^w^u^, 
fulness;  they  cannot  be  disunited  from  it; 
they  must  be  in  it  to  render  it  what  it  is. — 
These  perfections,  in  opposition  to  the  Gnos- 
tic opinion  of  the  Divine  pleroma,  and  of  the 
person  of  Christ,  the  Apostle  declares  to  be 
the  real  pleroma  of  Godhead,  which  dwells  in 
Christ.  But  these  cannot  dwell  in  the  hu- 
man nature  of  Christ,  nor  in  any  other  cre- 
ated nature.  Eternity,  immensity,  and  im- 
mutability, cannot,  in  any  sense,  be  said  to 
dwell  in  that  which  is  created — in  that  which 
has  dimensions,  and  in  that  which  experiences 
change.  To  affirm  so  would  be  a  contradiction 
— the  assertion  of  an  absolute  impossibility. 
Yet  these  perfections,  even  the  Divine  perfec- 
tions, the  pleroma  of  the  Godhead,  are  affirm- 
ed to  be  in  Christ.  They  must,  therefore,  be 
in  that  nature  which  is  capable  of  possessing 
them.  They  must  inhere  in  his  Divine  na- 
ture, which  is  the  Godhead,  and  which  took 
the  human  nature  into  union  with  itself.  What 
the  Apostle  predicates  of  Christ  is  true,  there- 
fore, of  his  Divinity.     The  Apostle  says  that 


164       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

this  fulness  dwells  in  Christ,  (r«^fltT<jtw?,  bodily. 
The  word  (r«^*,  commonly  translated  hody^ 
like  its  corresponding  Hebrew  word  n^u,  sig- 
nifies substance.  In  this  acceptation,  the  ple- 
roma  of  Godhead  is  said  to  dwell  in  Christ 
substantially ;  i.  e.  in  that  substance  which  is 
his  Godhead  are  all  the  perfections  correspon- 
dent therewith.  In  the  Divine  nature  of  the 
Messiah,  the  Apostle  announces  that  the  God- 
head is ;  that  the  pleroma  of  Godhead  is  there 
substantially  and  really. 

When  it  is  said,  Colossians  i.  19.  that 
"  it  pleased  the  Father  that  in  him,  (in  the 
Son,)  should  all  fulness  dwell,"  or  contiiiually 
dwell,  as  it  might  be  rendered, — this  expres- 
sion does  not  mean  that  by  the  pleasure  of 
the  Father  in  appointing  this  fulness,  as  our 
Lord's  human  nature  was  appointed,  all  ful- 
ness dwelt  in  him ;  but  it  means  that  the 
Father  was  pleased,  and  could  not  but  be 
pleased  with  his  own  nature,  or  Godhead,  in 
which,  in  the  person  of  the  Son,  all  fulness 
dwelt.  From  heaven,  this  pleasure  of  the 
Father  was  proclaimed,  on  the  banks  of  the 
Jordan,  to  the  inhabitants  of  earth ; — this 
pleasure  was  the  glory  which  the  Son  bad 
with  the  Father  before  the  world  was; — this 
pleasure  was  declared  when  men  beheld  the 


OF   CHRIST.  165 

human  nature  of  the  Son  ; — but  neither  this 
declaration,  nor  the  human  nature  of  the  Son, 
was  the  cause  of  its  commencement.  For 
the  Son  sajs  to  the  Father,  "  Thou  lovedst 
me  before  the  foundation  of  the  world."  And 
the  Father  says  to  the  Son,  *'  Thou  art  my 
beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased." 
The  Son  rejoiced  in  this  uncreated  pleasure 
with  the  Father.  "  And  I  was  daily  his  de- 
light," says  he,  "  rejoicing  always  before 
him."  The  Father  says  to  him,  "  Thou  art 
my  Son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee." 
With  the  joy,  then,  which  is  in  the  Eternal 
nature,  the  Father  was  pleased  that  in  his 
Son  all  fulness  should  dwell.  Without  the 
Divine  perfections  thus  dwelling  in  the  Son, 
he  could  not  be  a  Divine  person. 

Having  exhibited  the  Godhead,  and  per» 
fections  of  Godhead  which  dwell  in  the  Son, 
and  in  which  the  Father  was  well  pleased, 
the  Apostle  proceeds  to  describe  what  has 
been  achieved  by  the  Son  in  his  human  na- 
ture. "  And"  the  Father  was  also  pleased, 
("  having  made  peace  through  the  blood  of 
his  cross),  by  him  to  reconcile  all  things  unto 
himself,  by  him,  I  say,  whether  they  be  things 
in  earth  or  things  in  heaven."  The  results 
of  the  Messiah^s  reign  are  to  be  the  reconcili- 


166       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

ation  of  his  subjects  unto  himself,  and  their 
union  with  those  spirits  who  never  fell ;  so 
that  one  mighty  kingdom  shall  be  established 
whose  principles  shall  be  purity  and  happi- 
ness, whose  duration  shall  be  eternity,  whose 
citizens  shall  be  the  ransomed  of  the  earth, 
and  the  faithful  of  Heaven, — whose  bond  of 
union  shall  be  love. 

We  have  thus  an  exposition  of  the  Son's 
greatness,  as  Messiah,  on  account  of  the  in- 
herent energy  which,  as  God,  he  pbssesses, 
in  being  the  efficient  cause  of  his  Church — 
the  ruler  over  that  Church,  and  over  death. 
We  have  the  reasons  of  this  greatness  as- 
signed— because  he  has  the  all-pleroma,  or 
pleroma  of  Godhead,  even  the  perfections  of 
Godhead  dwelling  in  his  Deity,  and  because 
he  has,  in  human  nature,  through  his  blood, 
procured  a  uniting  principle  by  which  his 
subjects  and  angels  shall  coalesce  in  love  to 
God,  in  perpetual  happiness,  and  in  harmoni- 
ous perfection. 

From  the  whole  passage,  we  learn  that 
the  Son  is  essentially  the  image  of  the  invi- 
sible Godhead — that  he  is  Lord,  by  right,  of 
the  whole  creation — that  he  is  the  creator  of 
heaven  and  earth,  and  all  that  they  contain — 
that  lie  exists  uncaused,  and  is  the  cause  of 


OF    CHRIST.  167 

all — that  he  preserves  all  things ; — we  learn 
that,  having  human  nature  united  to  himself, 
and  being  Messiah,  the  Son  is  the  head  of 
the  Church — that  he  is  the  first  cause  of  the 
Church,  which  he  could  not  be  if  he  were  not 
God — that  he  is  Lord  of  the  dead — that,  in 
the  nature  which  assumed  human  nature,  and 
thereby  caused  his  Messiahship,  he  has  the 
all-jyleroma, — that,  through  the  efficacy  in- 
fused into  his  humanity,  he  is  uniting  and 
will  unite  angels  and  men,  who,  in  conse- 
quence, in  everlasting  harmony,  will  love 
each  other,  will  love  the  Messiah  who  effect- 
ed this  union,  and  the  God  who  gave  energy 
to  Messiah's  humanity. 

After  this  recapitulation  of  the  Son's  un- 
caused greatness,  who  can  doubt  that  he  is 
self-existent  and  eternal  ? 


,^.i\- 


168       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


Declaration  of  our  Lord,  concerning  his 
Eternal  Sonship. 

When  our  Lord  had,  on  the  Sabbath,  gra- 
ciously cured  the  impotent  man  lying  at  the 
pool  of  Siloam,  he  was  accused  by  the  Jews 
of  violating  the  Divine  commands  concern- 
ing the  observance  of  that  holy  day.  (John 
V.  1 — 16.  To  show  the  utter  fallacy  of  such 
an  accusation,  founded  on  the  action  per- 
formed, and  the  impossibility  of  a  violation 
of  the  Sabbath  by  him,  he  defends  himself  by 
an  exposition  of  his  dignity  and  authority, 
V.  17.  "  But  Jesus  answered  them.  My  Fa- 
ther  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  worh'^''  As  Son, 
he  claims  an  equality  with  the  Father  in 
working,  declaring  that,  when  the  Father 
works,  whether  in  creation  or  providence, — 
he  also  works.  The  Father  maintains  and 
preserves  his  workmanship,  as  much  on  the 
Sabbath  as  on  other  days ;   and  it  was,  there- 


OF    CHRIST.  169 

fore,  competent  for  the  Son,  in  human  nature, 
to  perform,  m  creation,  whatever  works  seem- 
ed good  to  him.  Had  the  Son  been  inferior 
to  the  Father,  his  reasoning  would  have  been 
inconclusive  ;  for  no  created  nature  could 
have  a  right  to  work  on  the  day  of  rest,  or 
on  any  other  occasion,  merely  because  the 
Father  does  at  all  times  whatsoever  he 
pleases.  If  the  Son  and  the  Father  are  equal 
in  w^orking,  and  the  actions  of  the  Son  are 
proper  in  themselves,  as  the  Father's  also 
are, — the  Son,  who  does  thus  work,  must 
have  been  in  the  state  of  Son  from  everlast- 
ing. If  the  Son  had  ever  been  in  a  diiferent 
state,  the  work  of  creation  could  not  have 
been  performed  by  him,  as  is  asserted  in  the 
epistles  to  the  Hebrews  and  Colossians,  and 
by  Christ  himself, — but  must  have  been  done 
in  the  state  in  which  he  existed,  prior  to 
creation.  If  actions  are  erroneously  ascribed 
to  him  as  Son,  he  not  being  in  that  related 
state  prior  to,  and  during  the  work  of,  crea- 
tion, we  have  no  security  that  actions  are 
not,  in  like  manner,  erroneously  ascribed  to 
him,  subsequently  to  creation,  and  during 
his  manifestation  in  the  flesh.  But  this  can- 
not be  ; — otherwise,  the  authenticity  of  Scrip- 
ture is  destroyed.  Our  Lord,  to  prevent  the 
15 


170  THE    ETERNAL    SON  SHIP 

possibility  of  such  conclusions,  expressly  de- 
clares that  all  the  works  which  are,  are  those 
of  the  Father  and  the  Son;  that  they  are 
performed  by  them  in  these  related  states; 
and  that,  in  these  states,  they  continue,  in  the 
Godhead,  to  rule  the  universe.  The  Jews  felt 
the  full  force  and  exact  import  of  our  Lord's 
declaration,  and  their  indignation  was  excited 
that  he,  in  whom  they  could  see  neither  ''  form 
nor  comeliness,"  should  not  only  maintain  his 
authority  over  the  Sabbath,  but  assert  that 
God  was  his  Father,  "  making  himself  equal 
with  God."  V.  18.  "  Therefore  the  Jews 
sought  the  more  to  kill  him,  because  he  not 
only  had  broken  the  Sabbath,  but  said  also 
that  God  was  his  Father,  making  himself  equal 
with  God.^^  The  Jews,  as  a  nation,  had,  in 
one  sense,  claimed  God  as  their  Father ;  their 
prophets  and  kings  had  claimed  him  in  that 
capacity.  They  must,  therefore,  have  under- 
stood our  Lord,  on  this  occasion,  as  claiming 
him  to  be  his  Father  in  the  Godhead.  "  By 
"  calling  God  peculiarly  his  Father,  (he)  had 
''  equalled  himself  ivith  God,  ttat^co  i^iov  iMyi 

"  Tov  ©gov,   iffov  \x\jrQV  noicav  rca  Gica.     (English 

"  Translation)  Said  also  that  God  was  his  Fa- 
"  ther,  making  hiinself  equal  ivith  God,  On  a 
"  little  reflection,  it  must  be  evident  that  the 


OF    CHRIST.  ni 

''  sense  is  here  imperfectly  expressed.     For 

"  how  could  those  men  say  that  Jesus,  by 

"  calling  God  his  Father,  made  himself  equal 

"  with   God^   when   they   made   no   scruple 

''  themselves  to  call    God   their   father  (ch. 

''  viii.    41.)  and  yet  would  have  thought  it 

*'  very  injurious  in  any  man  to  infer  that  they 

'^  made  themselves  equal  whh  God  ?     There 

*'  must,   therefore,  be  here  something  pecu- 

*'  liar  and  energetic  in  the  word  t^io^*     The 

'^  expression  in  most  familiar  use  would  have 

"  been  Tro^n^x  'iccvr^.     And,  though  I  am  far 

•'  from  saying  that  there  are  not  many  cases 

"  in  which   either  expression   may  be   used 

"  indifferently,  there  are  some  in  which  ^S^Qg 

"  is  more  emphatical,  and  others  in  which 

«'  it  would   not  be  strictly  proper.      Beza's 

«*  explanation  of  the  word  is  very  just ;  suum, 

"  i«f<ov,  id  est  sibi  proprium  ac  pecuUarevu^ 

**  In  this  view,  the  import  of  the  words  is, 

*'  that  God  is  Father  to  him,  in  a  sense  where  - 

"  in  he  is  Father  to  no  other.      Let  it  be 

**  observed,  however,  that  if  the  scope  of  the 

"  context  did  not  necessarily  lead  to  this  con- 

"  elusion,  I  should  not  infer  so  much  from 

*  The  translation  is,  proper  and  peculiar  to  one's  self.  In  tl>e 
present  passage,  consequently,  the  expression  means,  but  said 
also  that  God  was  his  proper  and  peculiar  Father, 


172       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHlt' 

"the  mere  application  of  the  word  i^iog:  for 
•^  though  this  is  strictly  the  import  of  the 
^'  term,  it  is  often,  like  many  other  words,  em- 
"  ployed  with  greater  latitude." — See  Camp- 
bell on  the  Gospels. 

Our  Lord,  instead  of  declaring  that  the 
Jews  had  misinterpreted  his  words,  proceeds 
to  enlarge  on  the  very  meaning  which  they 
assigned,  as  that  which  he  intended  to  con- 
vey. V.  19.  "  Then  ansivered  Jesus,  and 
said  unto  them,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
The  Son  can  do  nothing  of  himself,  hut  what 
he  seeth  the  Father  do:  for  what  things  so- 
ever he  doth,  these  also  doth  the  Son  likeivise.^^ 
Now,  as  it  is  admitted  that  the  Father  does 
those  works  which  are  peculiar  to  omnipo- 
tence,— for  it  will  not  be  disputed  that  the 
creation  of  heaven  and  earth  is  a  work  which 
none  but  an  omnipotent  Being  could  per- 
form,— the  Son  asserts  that  he  does  the  same 
work  of  omnipotence.  "  Of  himself"  he  can 
do  nothing ;  by  or  of  himself,  separate  from 
the  Father,  seeing  they  are  both  in  the  Di- 
vine essence,  it  is  impossible  that  he  can 
perform  any  thing.  The  Divine  nature  is 
undivided ;  what  is  done  in  it  by  one  person 
must  be  done  by  all  the  persons.  One  per- 
son, the  Son,  cannot  work  separately  from 


OF    CHRIST.  173 

the  Father;  his  very  nature,  from  its  con- 
stitution, must  act  in  union  with  itself.  But 
the  Father  is  in  that  nature,  as  is  also  the 
Son; — the  act  of  one  must,  therefore,  be  the 
act  of  both,  for  no  one  of  the  persons  can  act 
separately  from  the  other.  When  it  is  said 
that  the  Son  sees  the  Father  doing  the  works, 
no  other  meaning  can  be  affixed  to  the  ex- 
pression, except  that  of  simultaneous  know- 
ledge; for  the  Godhead  cannot  be  supposed 
to  see  by  the  medium  of  organic  matter,  as 
mankind  do.  Now,  let  it  be  remarked,  the 
Son  speaks  of  what  is  true  in  the  Divine  na- 
ture alone.  For  the  created  being  of  the 
loftiest  powers  cannot  accomplish  per  se,  the 
actions  which  are  essential  to  Godhead.  The 
greatest  external  work  of  Godhead  is  the 
causing  all  things  to  appear;  and  the  great- 
est manifestation  of  Deity,  which  we  can 
contemplate,  is  his  existence  as  our  uncaused 
cause.  In  this  greatest  external  work,  the 
causing  of  all  things,  and  in  this  highest 
glory  which  we  are  able  to  appreciate,  the 
Son  declares  himself  to  be  in  union  with  the 
Father.  Whatsoever  things  he  doeth,  the 
Son  doeth  likewise.  To  assert,  therefore, 
that  the  person  speaking  was  Son,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  aspect  which  he  bore  to  ere- 
15* 


174       THE  ETERNAL  30NSHIP 

ation — -in  consequence  of  his  assumption  of 
Mediatorial  functions,  or  of  any  other  event, 
— is  to  assert  that  he  was  not  Son  in  the 
greatest  external  work  of  Godhead,  which  is 
contrary  to  his  own  express  affirmation,  for 
he  groups  all  the  works  of  Godhead,  or  of  the 
Father,  as  being  likewise  his.     If  the  Son, 
then,  in  the  Godhead,  be  the  uncaused  cause 
of  all,  and  if  this  glory  be  peculiar  to  him  in 
his  state  of  Son,  no  modification  of  matter  or 
mind — no  event  in  heaven  or  in  earth,  can 
cause  hwi  to  be  in  the  state  of  Son,  within 
the  Godhead,  who,  as  Son,  called  all  things 
into  being.     Omnipotence  cannot  be  affected 
or  caused  to  assume  a  new  state,  because  the 
objects  which   it  has  called  into   being   are 
changed.     But  the  Son,  as  Son,  is  omnipo- 
tent.    The   principles   of  purity,  or   of  sin, 
of  happiness,  or  of  misery,  cannot  affect  or 
change  him  who  is  omnipotent.     It  may  be 
said,  did  he  not  become  Messiah  and  Media- 
tor for  his  people,  and  did  he  not,  in  these 
characters,  and  does  he  not  in  these  charac- 
ters, perform  offices  and  works  which  are  not 
essential  to  him  in  the  Godhead?     This  is 
readily  granted.     But  it  is  necessary  to  at- 
tend to  the  mode  in  which  these  offices  and 
works  are   performed.      They   are   not  the 


OF    CHRIST.  175 

works  of  the  Godhead,  or  of  the  Divine  na- 
ture, absolutely  considered,  but  of  the  Di- 
vine nature  united  with  that  human  nature 
which  this  person  of  the  Godhead  assumed, 
— and,  in  virtue  of  this  union,  they  are  effi- 
cacious in  accomplishing  what  the  expres- 
sions import  will  be  achieved.  The  state,  in 
which  the  Divine  person  exists,  cannot  be 
changed  in  consequence  of  this  union,  other- 
wise, humanity  would  be  equal,  nay  superior, 
to  the  Deity,  seeing  it  was  able  to  alter  it. 
Now,  he  had  the  state  of  Son,  in  his  uncaused 
nature,  when  he  caused  all  things.  But 
his  humanity  has  apparently  changed,  and 
does  apparently  change  in  itself,  and  in  its 
relation  to  men  ;  or  rather,  strictly  speaking, 
it  appears  to  them  to  change  in  consequence 
of  the  changes  which  they  undergo  in  them- 
selves,— while,  in  reality,  it  still  continues 
the  same  in  the  principles  which  are  infused 
into  it,  in  virtue  of  its  union  with  the  Divine 
nature.  In  its  external  indications  it  was 
born ;  it  grew  in  stature  ;  it  ceased  to  possess 
vital  energy ;  it  has  had  vital  energy  restored ; 
it  has  been  exalted,  and  has  had  a  name  given 
to  it  above  every  name ; — but  the  principles 
of  its  reasonable  soul  were  the  same,  in  in- 
creasing vigour,  until  his  exaltation.     Its  ac- 


176       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

tuating  principle  has  been  love,  infused  from 
the  eternal  love  which  caused  his  soul ;  and 
this  love,  during  his  continuance  on  earth,  ex- 
panded with  the  developement  of  its  powers. 
The, acts  of  grace  and  mercy  which  our  Lord 
accomplished,  the  miracles  which  he  per- 
formed, and  the  sermons  which  he  preached, 
were  only  different  exhibitions  of  love ;  and 
his  Mediatorial  work  in  heaven  is  only  the 
continuation  of  that  love  which  was  displayed 
on  earth.  When  Christ  is  said  to  fulfil 
the  offices  of  a  Prophet,  of  a  Priest,  and  of 
a  King,  he  cannot  be  understood,  at  one 
time,  and  to  one  person,  to  be  actually  a 
Prophet,  and,  at  another  time,  and  to  ano- 
ther person,  to  be  a  Priest  or  King,  in  the 
manner  that  different  men,  at  different  times, 
and  to  different  individuals,  have  borne  these 
offices.  But  these  expressions  mean  that  his 
energetic  love  infused  by  the  Divine  nature, 
in  which  he  subsists,  is  applicable  to  the  state 
of  men  whether  in  ignorance,  in  guilt,  or  un- 
der the  reign  of  sin.  Their  different  aspects, 
in  these  states,  are  approached  and  remedied 
by  his  all-prevailing  love,  which  does  not  as- 
sume a  different  nature  in  consequence  of 
their  different  conditions,  but  is  the  princi- 
ple which  suits  all  the  conditions  of  men.— 


OF   CHRIST.  177 

The  difference  of  names  applicable  to  the 
procedure  of  Christ,  arises  from  our  appre- 
hension of  the  different  situations  of  men ; 
but  does  not  originate  from  any  actual  change 
in  his  situation,  that  he  may  become  suited 
to  them.  When  Christ  sorrowed  on  earth, 
this  was  only  the  display  of  his  love,  arising 
from  mens'  hardened  and  depraved  obsti- 
nacy ;  but  the  love  w^as  not,  thereby,  changed 
into  the  unmixed  emotion  of  sorrow .  When 
he  rode  in  triumph  amidst  the  Hosannahs 
of  the  multitude,  his  love  was  not  changed 
into  a  Monarchical  assumption  of  grandeur, 
but  was  only  thus  exhibited  to  the  multi- 
tude. 

In  the  constitution  of  the  created  natures 
on  earth,  we  discern  certain  fixed  principles 
which  inhere  in  this  constitution,  and  with- 
out which  they  could  not  exist  as  men.  They 
cannot  perceive  any  change,  without  believ- 
ing that,  in  future,  the  same  antecedent  cir- 
cumstances will  be  followed  by  the  same 
consequents,  and  that,  therefore,  the  future 
train  of  physical  events  will  resemble  the 
past.  They  cannot  view  certain  actions  with- 
out either  approbation  or  disapprobation.  But, 
in  addition  to  these  constitutional  principles 
which   are    inseparable    from    the    existence 


178       THE  ETERNAL  30NSHIP 

of  man,  there  was  in  the  constitution  of 
Christ's  nature  which  had  no  sin, — a  prin- 
ciple which  men  cannot  possess,  because  they 
have  sin.  This  is  the  actuating  love  com- 
municated from  the  Divinity,  which  was 
inseparable  from  the  being  of  his  reasonable 
soul,  and  without  which  he  could  not  have 
been  Messiah.  This  principle  is  both  m 
the  constitution  of  his  soul,  and  is  the  source 
of  his  Messiahship.  This  love  is  present- 
ed to  man  in  every  situation,  and  becomes 
to  him  prophetical  or  instructive, — priestly 
or  purifying, — kingly  or  predominant  over 
sin,  in  those  different  respects,  in  which  man 
views  it,  and  feels  it  applied  to  himself.  It 
is  not  only  inherent  in  the  constitution  of 
Christ,  but  it  is  the  pervading  energy  which 
excites  and  directs  the  every  exertion  of  his 
soul.  Without  this  principle  constitutionally 
existing  and  actively  exerted  within  his  na- 
ture, he  could  not  have  been  the  Saviour  of 
those  who  had  sinned  and  excluded  them- 
selves from  the  love  of  God.  As  there  can 
be  no  fixed  purpose  without  a  fixed  princi- 
ple— as  there  can  be  no  end  attained,  with- 
out a  fixed  purpose  directed  by  a  fixed  prin- 
ciple, we  discern,  in  Christ,  the  purpose  di- 
rected by  the  inherent  principle  of  his  na- 


OF    CHRIST.  179 

til  re,  which  enabled  him  to  attain  the  end 
for  which  he  lived,  and  died,  and  rose  again 
— viz.  the  salvation  of  his  people  through  his 
love.  By  such  a  review,  we  perceive  the  fal- 
lacy which  supposes  the  possibility  of  our  Lord 
becoming  Son,  as  God,  in  consequence  of  his 
procedure  in  the  salvation  of  man.  For  there 
not  only  can  be  no  change  of  his  state,  in  his 
aspect  towards  man,  as  God,  but,  in  human 
nature,  there  can  be  no  change  of  the  state  of 
his  soul — which  was  essentially  formed  in, 
and  which  acted  by,  love.  The  notion  which 
supposes  the  commencement  of  our  Lord's 
state  of  Sonship,  must  originate,  primarily, 
from  an  erroneous  view  of  the  complexity  of 
his  person,  and  must  be  originally  deduced  from 
an  erroneous  apprehension  of  the  external 
changes  which  his  body  underwent  on  earth. 
When  we  consider  the  complex  aspect  of  our 
Lord,  we  discover  the  Divine  nature,  and  his 
Divine  person  inseparable  therefrom,  which 
were  uncaused,  and  could,  therefore,  never 
be  caused  to  become  Son,  or  to  take  the  de- 
signation of  Son, — and  we  discover  the  hu- 
man nature  composed  of  a  true  body  and  a 
reasonable  soul ;  which  reasonable  soul  never 
changed  in  its  principle  of  inherent  and  ac- 
tuating energy  of  love,   but   only  increased 


180  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

progressively  therein,  as  was  consentaneous 
to  the  nature  of  a  human  soul ;  and  which 
true  body  did  change,  and  hunger  and  thirst, 
and  undergo  all  the  vicissitudes  to  which  a 
human  body  is  liable  in  the  present  state  of 
the  world ; — for,  without  these  vicissitudes, 
it  would  not  have  been  a  true  body.  The 
opponents  of  the  Eternal  Sonship  of  our  Lord 
are,  then,  either  reduced  to  the  necessity  of 
affirming  that  there  is  no  person  in  the  God- 
head who  bears  the  name  of  Son  and  exists 
in  that  related  state,  and,  consequently,  that 
there  are  no  persons  in  the  Godhead ;  (for 
we  have  shown,  that  if  there  be  persons,  the 
Son  must  be  essentially  a  person)— or  else 
they  must  assert  the  preposterous  contradic- 
tion, that  the  state  of  manhood  caused  to  the 
Son  his  state  of  Sonship. — We  have  shown 
that  his  Godhead  cannot  change  its  state — 
that  even  his  human  soul  never  changed,  and 
never  can  change  its  functions — that  it  pos- 
sesses one  and  only  one  influential  principle, 
which  must  be  one,  in  consequence  of  the 
source  from  which  it  is  derived.  This  prin- 
ciple increased,  because  it  was  in  his  human 
soul,  but  it  does  not  in  reality  assume  differ- 
ent functions ;  it  only  appears  to  do  so  in 
consequence  of  our  situation.      He  has  the 


OF    CHRIST.  181 

all-prevalent  energy  of  this  principle  in  his 
nature  ;  and  to  us,  and  for  us,  it  is  that  of  a 
Prophet,  a  Priest,  and  a  King.  It  is  our 
state  which  causes  us  to  experience  the  bene- 
fits flowing  therefroQi.  This  principle  comes 
to  us  in  our  wants  and  in  our  crimes,  by  the 
fitness  and  adaptation  of  saving  love.  The 
love  which  enlightens  our  understanding  is 
to  us  the  love  of  a  Prophet ;  the  love  which 
washes  away  the  guilt  of  sin  is  that  of  a 
Priest ;  and  the  love  which  rules  in  us,  and 
*'  restrains  and  conquers  all  his  and  our  ene- 
mies," is  that  of  a  King.  But,  because  such 
is  the  fact,  we  cannot  deduce  from  it  the 
monstrous  inference,  that  a  person  inhering 
in  the  Divine  nature  assumes  another  state 
with  reference  to  the  other  persons  in  the 
Godhead.  This  would  be  to  affirm  that, — 
because  in  consequence  of  our  condition  the 
energy  of  God  in  Christ  must  be  applied  to 
us  so  that  we  feel  it  in  different  capacities, — 
the  same  energy  of  the  Godhead  nmst,  in 
consequence,  be  also  applied  within  itself, 
so  that  the  persons  of  the  Godhead  must  ex- 
perience it,  rendering  one  of  them  Son,  and 
another  Father.  Christ,  in  his  Mediatorial 
office,  is  experimentally  apprehended  by  us 
in  his  influential  energy,  in  different  capaci- 
16 


182       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

ties, — but  does  it,  therefore,  follow,  or  can  it 
follow  that  the  application  of  this  energy  to 
the  different  situations  of  man  will  cause  the 
Godhead  to  experience  it,  and  in  this  expe- 
rience of  its  different  persons,  cause  an  al- 
teration of  their  related  states,  and  give  de- 
signations illustrative  of  such  states  ?  We 
have  so  often  shown  the  impossibility  of  such 
a  result,  that  it  is  needless  again  to  exhibit 
it.  Such  a  supposition  reduces  the  name  of 
Son,  and  every  other  name,  and  the  rest  of 
the  Divine  persons,  to  a  mere  nullity.  Ac- 
cording to  this  supposition,  we  have  neither 
designation  nor  statement  of  persons  in  the 
Godhead  ;  all  the  names  employed  —  the 
names  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  are 
mere  sounds,  without  reality  in  the  Divine 
nature ;  they  are  merely  perceptions  and  de- 
finitions of  human  feelings  receiving  certain 
impressions  of  Godhead,  to  which  we  choose 
to  affix  these  certain  names,  and  which  are 
communicated  to  us  in  Scripture,  in  accord- 
ance with  such  previous  feelings. 

The  argument  deducing  the  Sonship  of 
Christ  from  his  aspect  towards  man,  when 
fairly  analyzed,  reduces  not  only  the  Son 
himself,  but  the  other  persons  of  the  God- 
head,  to  mere  abstract  conceptions  of  our 


OF    CHRIST.  183 

minds,  when  they  receive  impressions  of  Di- 
vine energy.  The  reasoning  of  our  adversa- 
ries, when  divested  of  foreign  associations 
and  sifted  to  the  bottom,  stands  thus: — the 
Divine  person  who  immediately  accomplished 
our  salvation,  and  who,  therefore,  assumed 
humanity,  bears  a  new  relation  towards  men ; 
he  is  then'  Messiah  ;  the  designation  Eternal 
Son  is  a  contradiction ;  and  Christ  is  only 
termed  Son  on  account  of  the  relation  which 
he  assumed,  and  which  he  bears  to  man,  in 
his  procedure  with  the  other  Divine  persons 
to  effect  man's  salvation. 

These  premises  are  founded  on  a  fallacy  ; 
for  the  Son,  as  a  Divine  person,  could  assume 
no  new  relation  or  relations  toward  man ; 
his  relation  towards  man  must  have  always 
been  the  same,  as  it  originates  with  his  im- 
mutable nature  and  perfections.  The  rela- 
tion of  man  towards  God,  and  the  princi- 
ples which  produced  his  relationship,  were 
changed ;  but  the  principles  of  the  Divine 
nature,  towards  an  object,  can  never  be 
changed.  Whatever  newness  of  state  existed 
between  God  and  man,  was  the  effect  of  sin, 
and,  therefore,  originated  with  man,  and  was 
a  newness  of  state  peculiar  and  belonging  to 
man,  but  not  to  God.     When  the  Son  took 


184  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

humanity,  he  did  not  become  a  new  person  : 
consequently,  he  could  obtain  no  new  rela- 
tion between  himself  and  man.  But  the  ef- 
fect of  this  assumption  was,  through  the  me- 
dium of  his  humanity,  to  restore  man  to  that 
relation  with  the  Deity  which  man  had  lost, 
and  to  produce  a  change  in  him,  so  that  he 
might  experience  that  relation  from  which  he 
had  withdrawn  himself.  The  human  nature 
was  the  mean  employed  by  the  Deity  to  pro- 
duce this  alteration  in  the  state  of  riian,  but 
not  in  his  own  state.  The  utter  impossibility 
of  the  assumption  of. a  new,  different,  or 
changed  state  towards  man,  is  founded  on  the 
inherent  immutability  of  Deity,  which  cannot 
be  affected  by  the  mutability  of  creatures. 
The  newness,  difference,  or  change,  is  in  the 
feelings  of  the  creatures  who  contemplate 
and  experience  the  energies  of  Deity,  not  in 
the  Deity  who  is  contemplated.  This  new- 
ness is  occasioned  by  the  medium,  viz.  our 
Lord's  human  nature,  which  they  either 
sensibly  beheld,  or  by  testimony  now  credit, 
and  which  was  employed  to  produce  this 
change  in  the  feelings  of  men.  But  even 
were  it  granted  that  the  Deity  had  assumed 
a  new  relation  towards  man,  this  would  not 
prove,  nor  could   it  by  any  inference  imply, 


OF    CHRIST.  185 

that  the  persons  in  the  Godhead  had  assumed 
a  new  relation  amongst  themselves. — When 
our  opponents  affirm  that  the  Sonship  of 
Christ  cannot  be  eternal,  because  it  is  a  con- 
tradiction, this  is  only  taking  for  granted  the 
thing  to  be  proved,  and  then  reasoning  in  a 
circle  on  their  own  assertion.  They  take 
for  granted  the  newness  of  a  relation  on  the 
part  of  God,  towards  man ;  they  take  for 
granted  the  impossibility  of  the  Eternal  Son- 
ship  of  Christ ;  they  adjnit  related  states 
within  the  Godhead,  and  assert  that  one  of 
these  is  a  state  not  eternal,  viz.  that  of  Son, 
arising  from  the  aspect  of  God  in  the  plan  of 
salvation.  The  state  of  Son  must  either  be 
a  mere  name  without  meaning,  or  a  reality. 
If  it  be  a  reality,  it  is  real  within  the  God- 
head ;  for  the  most  determined  opponents 
of  Christ's  Sonship  do  not  say  that  it  is  a  re- 
lation between  the  person  so  called  and  man. 
It  must,  consequently,  be  within  the  God- 
head, and  between  Divine  persons.  What  is 
within  the  Godhead  must  have  been  always 
there;  otherwise  the  Godhead  is  changed. 
A  relation  between  Divine  persons  can  no 
more  have  a  beginning  than  the  Divine  per- 
sons themselves ;  otherwise,  the  Divine  per- 
sons are  not  eternal,  but  fortuitous,  in  their 
16* 


186  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

State  of  existence.  If  the  term  Son  be  a 
mere  name  indicative  of  no  state,  but  chosen 
by  accident,  and  given  because  it  is  as  good 
as  any  other  name, — the  related  states  of  tlie 
Godhead  and  the  persons  of  the  Godhead  are 
nullities — language  is  no  more  the  significa- 
tion of  human  thought — universal  scepticism 
respecting  ourselves,  all  things,  God  himself, 
is  introduced.  The  plan  pursued, — the  part 
(we  have  no  adequate  expression  for  these 
ideas,)  performed  by  each  Divine  person  in 
the  recovery  of  man — could  not  introduce  re- 
lated states  within  the  Godhead  ; — this  could 
only  give  certain  feelings  to  man  as  he  expe- 
rienced the  impression  of  these  parts ;  other- 
wise his  feelings  of  the  procedure  of  each 
Divine  person,  must  have  created  related 
states  in  the  Godhead — and  what  he  feels, 
must  be  felt  by  the  Divine  persons,  so  as  to 
cause  their  existence  as  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost.  On  the  supposition  of  our  ad- 
versaries^ viz.  because  man  has  sinned,  the 
Divine  procedure,  must  be  exhibited  in  states 
which  are  not  eternal, ^ — the  Divinity  must 
introduce  a  change  within  itself,  consequent 
on  the  failure  of  man,  and  be  a  Father,  a  Son, 
and  a  Holy  Spirit,  in  its  persons.  But  an 
eternal  and  immense  person   acting   accord- 


OF    CHRIvST.  187 

ing  to  his  own  iinture,  cannot,  by  his  own 
act,  become  a  new  person,  or  exist  in  a  new 
relation  to  another.  When  we  divest  their 
reasoning  of  all  ambiguity,  it  resolves  itself 
into  this: — that  the  eternal  persons  of  the 
Godhead,  in  restoring  man,  became  what 
they  were  not  from  eternity;  one  of  them, 
consequently,  did  become  Son  m  relation  to 
another,  or  he  became  Son  to  man,  or  his  de- 
signation of  Son  is  an  empty  name.  We 
reply:  he  could  not,  thereby,  become  Son 
to  the  other  Divine  persons,  because  he  is 
an  eternal  person ;  he  could  not  become  Son 
to  the  creatures,  because  their  nature  is  not 
his  nature,  because  they  cannot  change  that 
which  is  eternal ;  he  could  not  be  Son  by 
mere  empty  name,  because  such  an  assertion 
overthrows  all  principles  of  belief  in  the  ex- 
istence of  God,  of  created  mind,  or  of  cre- 
ated matter.  Can  the  procedure  of  Divine 
persons  in  creation,  in  providence,  or  in  re- 
demption, cause  them  to  exist  in  states  in 
which  they  were  not,  prior  to  such  exter- 
nal exhibition  ?  Can  the  mode  in  which 
man  apprehends  Divine  persons,  constitute 
in  them  new  states  ?  Can  the  feelings  of 
man,  experiencing,  in  salvation,  these  persons 
to  be  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost — be  also 


188  THE    ETERxXAL    SO^'SHIP 

their  feelings,  and  produce  in  them  such 
states  ?  Legitimate  reasoning  answers,  No. 
Our  opponents  are  driven  to  the  alternative 
of  presuming  that  God  not  only  changed  the 
relation  of  man  to  himself,  when  he  recovered 
him  from  sin,  but  that  he  also  changed  his 
own  relation  tof  persons,  in  order  that  man 
might  be  recovered.  They  must  be  brought 
to  this  absurd  conclusion,  when  their  reason- 
ing is  fairly  analyzed.  When  the  fallacy  is 
detected,  we  discover  that  it  originates  in 
the  confusion  of  our  mode  of  apprehending 
a  being,  with  the  being  who  is  apprehended. 
It  rests  on  the  supposition — that  because 
God  has  revealed  himself,  in  the  salvation  of 
man,  to  be  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  and 
because  we  are  enabled  to  apprehend  these 
persons  in  salvation,  and  because  their  pro- 
cedure in  salvation  is  actually  a  work  of  time, 
— one  of  these  persons  is  only  in  time  ac- 
tually existing  as  Son.  But  our  apprehen- 
sion of  a  being,  and  the  being  who  is  appre- 
hended, are,  in  reality,  different;  our  know- 
ledge of  the  existence  of  the  being  acting 
in  any  manner,  does  not  give  to  that  being 
the  commencement  of  existence,  in  that  man- 
ner in  which  the  mind  contemplates  it.  The 
knowledge  of  the  mind  respecting  a  being, 


OF    CHRIST.  189 

and  the  being  itself,  are  different.  So  our 
knowledge  obtained  by  revelation  of  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  Son  acts — which  know- 
ledge is  in  our  mind — does  not  make  the 
Son  commensurate  with  our  knowledge,  or 
with  that  salvation  in  which  he  acts.  Nei- 
ther, therefore,  the  existence  of  man,  nor 
his  mode  of  contemplating  the  person  who  is 
Son,  could  make  him  Son.  This  Divine  per- 
son exists  independently  of  man  or  of  man's 
knowledge ;  and  this  person,  who  exists  as 
Son,  cannot  derive  his  state  from  any  situa- 
tion of  man,  or  from  any  external  procedure 
of  his  own.  What  he  is  at  any  one  period, 
he  must  be  from  eternity.  When  he  is  Son, 
as  a  Divine  person,  at  one  moment,  he  is 
Son  eternally.  If  it  be  said  that  he  became 
Son  by  his  own  mere  good  pleasure,  in  order 
to  rescue  man,  this  assertion  is  only  remov- 
ing the  difficulty  a  step  farther,  for  it  sup- 
poses the  previous  state  of  man  to  have  pro- 
duced the  consequent  resolution  to  become 
Son,  and  likewise  supposes  the  Divine  Be- 
ing to  be  mutable  and  defective,  seeing  he 
could,  by  his  own  will,  become  that  which 
he  was  not  before.  The  result  of  the  whole 
examination  is  the  discovery  of  the  mistake 
which  supposes,  that  our  feelings  of  the  ope- 


190        THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

ration  of  a  Divine  person,  make  him  to  be- 
come a  Divine  person,  in  consequence  of  that 
process  in  which  we  feel  him  to  operate  ;  and 
this  mistake  farther  supposes  that  there  can 
be  contingent  states  in  that  Godhead  which 
is  eternal. 

But  some  maintain  that  the  person  of  our 
Lord  is  not  changed  by  becoming  Son,  as 
this  is  a  mere  appellation  conferred  on  his 
person,  when  employed  in  his  redeeming  as- 
pect; as  a  title,  for  example,  is  conferred  on 
any  one  who  is  elevated  to  the  Peerage,  yet 
is  not  changed  in  his  person,  by  being  called 
a  Lord  ;  or  as  an.  individual  is  not  rendered 
different  from  what  he  was  before,  by  being 
made  an  Ambassador,  and  styled  your  Excel- 
lency, This  explanation  is  only  a  resort  to 
words  employed  in  human  transactions,  and 
a  transference  of  them,  as  mere  sounds  with- 
out meaning,  to  remove  the  difficulty.  It 
takes  for  granted  what  must  be  proved,  that 
the  designation  Son  expresses  only  a  name 
conferred  in  consequence  of  the  Mediatorial 
work,  after  the  assumption  of  human  nature. 
It  is  inadmissible,  because  there  can  be  no 
possible  analogy  between  the  things  com- 
pared ;  for  the  titles  of  men  are  indicative  of 
degrees  ofrrmk,  which  are  their  own  arbitrary 


OF    CHRIST.  191 

contrivances ;  whereas,  the  name  of  Son  ex- 
presses no  degree  of  rank  or  honour,  but  a 
positive  participation  of  nature  in  a  related 
state.     To  assert,  then,  that  the  designation 
Son  was  bestowed  on  him,  in  consequence  of 
an  earthly  event,  is  to  assert  that  a  new  re- 
lated state  of  nature  was  also  given  to  him, 
subsisting  between  him  and  the   other  per- 
sons of  the  Godhead ;  w  hich  supposition  we 
have  already  sufficiently  refuted.     The  new 
title  of  rank  conferred  on  ah  individual  does 
not  produce  a  new  relation  between  his  na- 
ture and   any  other  nature; — but  the  being 
made  Son  cannot  be  disunited  either  in  our 
notion  or  in  the  reality  of  the  fact,  from  re- 
lation in  nature  to  him  to  whom  he  is  Son. 
If  it  be  asserted  that  the  name  of  Son  is  only 
figurative — descriptive   cf  a   figurative   rela- 
tion in  the  Godhead,  as  we  say  son  of  liberty, 
son  of  genius^  fcc. — then,  all  the  other  names, 
the  name  of  Father,  and  of  Holy  Spirit,  or 
whatever  other  appellations  are  given  to  the 
persons  of  the  Godhead,  must  be  also  figura- 
tive, as  they  are  used  exactly  in  the  same 
manner,  and  associated  with  the  appellation 
Son.     If  these  designations  of  Divine  persons 
be  only  figurative,  there  are  no  actual  and 
bona  fide  designations  of  persons  in  the  God- 


192  THE    ETERNAT.    S0NSH11> 

head;  consequently,  there  is  no  declaration 
of  Divine  persons,  nor  do  the  Scriptures  con- 
tain any  account  of  a  Trinity  of  persons. 

Our  Lord  proceeds  to  assert  his  equality 
with  the  Father,  not  only  from  his  participa- 
tion with  him  in  acts  of  omnipotence,  but 
also  of  omniscience  :  v.  20.  "  For  the  Father 
loveth  the  Son,  and  shoiveth  him  all  things 
that  himself  doeth :  and  he  will  shoio  him 
greater  works  than  these,  that  ye  may  mar- 
veV^  We  have  already  alluded  to  that  ever- 
lasting complacency  which  is  described  as 
existing  among  the  Divine  persons,  and  which 
is  here  noticed  by  our  Lord  as  enjoyed  be- 
tween him  and  the  Father.  He  asserts  that 
he  enjoys  the  love  of  the  Father.  If  the  per- 
son, the  Father,  be  eternal,  and  the  person  of 
him  who  is  Son  be  eternal,  this  love  must 
have  also  been  eternal.  As  no  change  could 
have  rendered  the  latter  person  Son, — because 
this  would  have  been  the  introduction  of  a 
new  related  state  in  the  nature  of  the  Godhead 
— the  Son  must  be  eternal,  in  the  enjoyment 
of  this  love.  And  the  Father  showeth  him  all 
things  that  himself  doeth.  We  need  scarcely 
notice,  that  the  acts  done  by  the  Father  in 
the  Godhead,  could  not  have  been  shown  in 
the  mode  in  which  the  acts  of  mortals  are 


OF    CHRIST.  193 

shown  to  one  another,  by  sensation  and  per- 
■ception.  The  showing,  therefore,  by  the  Fa- 
ther, must  signify  the  inherent  knowledge 
which  Divine  persons  must  reciprocally  pos- 
sess of  the  procedure  of  each  other.  One 
cannot  perform  an  act  which  is  not  shown  to 
the  other,  or  which  is  not  perfectly  the  ob- 
ject of  knowledge  of  the  one  as  much  as  of 
the  other.  The  acts  of  the  Godhead,  its  "  all 
things,"  can  be  only  shown  to,  or  perfectly 
comprehended  by,  him,  who  is  Divine.  The 
Son  claims  this  omniscience — this  perfect 
equality  of  knowledge,  which  is  mutually 
possessed  between  him  and  the  Father. — 
None  but  a  person  in  the  Divine  nature  could 
be  shown  "  all  things"  which  it  doeth  ;  the 
person  speaking,  is,  therefore,  in  the  Divine 
nature,  in  that  state  in  which  he  spoke :  for 
in  his  then  state  of  Sonship  he  asserted  this 
knowledge  to  be  his.  As  the  Son  possesses 
omniscience,  he  must  possess  it  in  the  Divine 
nature ;  if  the  Son  be  in  the  Divine  nature  as 
Son,  he  is  so  eternally,  for  there  can  be  no 
change  within  that  nature. 

Our  Lord  says,  that  these  Divine  persons 

would  perform  still  greater  works  than  they 

had  hitherto  achieved.     Under  the  continued 

figure  of  ''  being  shown"  by  the  Father  the 

17 


194       THE  ETERNAL  S0N3HIP 

greater  works  which  were  to  be  accomplished 
by  him,  in  Divine  purpose  and  fulfilment,  the 
Son  describes  his  knowledge,  which  extend- 
ed  to  futurity,    and   embraced  the  external 
''  works"  of  the.  Godhead,    "  greater"  than 
those  which  had  been  as  yet  accomplished. 
The  works  can  only  be  understood  as  "  great- 
er" in  the  estimation  of  men  ;  for  with  om- 
nipotence there  can  be   neither  greater  nor 
less.     By  these  "  greater  works"  which  were 
yet  to  occur,  our  Lord,  doubtless,  meant  the 
glorious   exploits   of   his   human   nature,   in 
which  he  was  to  overthrow  the  reign  of  sin 
and  death,  destroy  his  enemies,  procure  the 
triumph  of  virtue,  remove  the  present  mate- 
rial system,  and  in  its  place,  form  "  new  hea- 
vens and  a  new  earth."    The  commencement 
of  these  splendid  works,  our  Lord  says,  would 
be  seen  by  those  Jews  who  heard  him,  so 
that  they  "  w^ould  marvel,"  when  that  ap- 
pearance which  was  "  despised  and  rejected 
of  men,"  exhibited,  in  its  actions,  a  power 
derived  from  heaven. 

V.  2L  "  For  as  the  Father  raiseth  up  the 
dead,  and  quickeneth  them :  even  so  the  Son 
quickeneth  ivhom  he  loilV — The  one-ness  of 
the  Father  and  Son,  in  omnipotent  energy, 
is  here  described.     "  My  power,"  says  the 


OF    CHRIST.  195 

Son,  in  the  designation  which  he  gives  him- 
self, "  extends  to  the  mansions  of  death,  as 
well  as  the  Father's  power." 

V.  22.  "  For  the  Father  judgeth  no  man, 
but  hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the 
Son.^^ — Our  Lord  here  evidently  speaks  of 
himself  in  the  Divinity  of  his  Messiahship,  in 
which  Divine  nature  he  asserts  his  equality 
with  the  Father  ;  for  the  judgment  or  equita- 
ble determination  respecting  all  thoughts  and 
actions,  can  only  belong  to  a  Divine  person, 
in  whom  omniscience  resides.  By  the  me- 
dium of  his  human  nature,  our  Lord  will 
judge  "  the  deeds  done  in  the  body,"  on  that 
day  when  he  will  "  give  to  every  man  accord- 
ing as  his  work  shall  be." 

V.  23 — 25.  "  That  all  men  should  honour 
the  So7i,  even  as  they  honour  the  Father,  He 
that  honoureth  not  the  So7i,  honoureth  not  the 
Father  which  hath  sent  him.  Verili/,  verily,  I 
say  unto  you,  He  that  heareth  my  icord,  and 
helieveth  on  him  that  sent  me,  hath  everlasting 
life,  and  shall  not  come  into  condemnation; 
hut  is  passed  from  death  unto  life.  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you.  The  hour  is  coming, 
and  now  is,  when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice 
of  the  Son  of  God :  and  they  that  hear  shall 
live*^^     In  these,  and  the  preceding  verses,  the 


196       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

Son  speaks  either  of  his  Divinity  in  itself,  or 
of  the  Divinity  of  his  Messiahship,  having 
humanity  united  to  it.  As  Son,  in  the  Divine 
nature,  he  claims  for  himself  all  the  preroga- 
tives of  Divinity ;  and  that  which  is  true  in 
the  Divine  nature,  at  any  one  time,  is  true 
for  ever.  The  Son  is,  therefore,  essentially 
God  in  the  Divine  nature,  and  ever  must 
have  been  Son. 

Our  Lord,  under  the  designation  of  the 
Son  of  Man ^  speaks,  from  the  26th  and  27th 
verses,  of  the  immediate  acts  of  his  humani- 
ty: — But  on  this  topic  we  shall  not  now  en- 
large, as  the  examination  of  the  expression 
Son  of  Man  will  form  a  subsequent  part  of 
our  remarks. 

The  evidence  of  the  Eternal  Sonship  of 
Christ  is  manifest  from  the  language  of  his 
own  declaration,  in  his  address  to  his  Father, 
recorded  in  the  xviith  chapter  of  John,  com- 
monly called  his  intercessory  or  mediatory 
prayer.  His  human  nature  had  performed 
the  benelicent  works  of  his  ministerial  charac- 
ter, and  the  period  approached,  when  he  was 
**  exceeding  sorrowful,  even  unto  death,"  in 
the  prospect  of  his  sufferings.  When  entering 
on  this  depth  of  humiliation,  his  "  reasonable 
!>oul"  poured  forth   its  feelings   and   wishes 


OF   CHUIST.  197 

to  the  Godhead,  in  the  person  of  the  Father. 
But  whilst  it  thus  spoke  and  felt,  there  are 
expressions  employed  which  cannot  be  pre- 
dicated of  any  created  being,  and  which  he 
could  not  have  used  when  declaring  the  emo- 
tions of  his  soul;  for  they  cannot  refer  to 
any  nature  which  is  the  workmanship  of  the 
Deity,  but  must  be  true  of  the  Deity  itself. 
We  have  frequently  had  occasion  to  mention 
the  complex  kind  of  our  Lord's  person, 
formed  of  his  Divinity  and  the  human  nature 
which  he  had  assumed.  This  human  nature 
was  the  medium  by  which  his  Divinit}^  dis- 
played itself,  and  was  in  union  with  the  Di- 
vinity. Through  it,  the  Divine  perfections 
were  manifested  to  men  ;  but  they  did  not 
exist  in  it  separately  from  the  Divinity.  It 
did  not  possess  these  perfections  as  its  own 
perfections ;  yet  they  belonged  to  that  person 
in  whom  it  existed.  Its  existence  in  Divinity 
was  not  an  existence  of  simple  support  and 
preservation,  but  a  real  union  or  junction 
(which  is  the  term  most  adequate  to  convey 
the  notion,)  to  that- person  in  whom  all  things 
exist. — While  the  Divine  perfections  were 
exliibited  through  it,  as  a  medium,  it  had 
one-ness  with  him  who  possessed  these  per- 
fections. It  was  not  eternal,  immense,  and  im- 
17* 


198       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

mutable,  onmipotent  and  omniscient ;  but  he 
who  is  eternal,  immense,  and  immutable,  om- 
nipotent and  omniscient,  acted  by  it  as  an 
instrument,  and  the  instrument  which  was 
thus  employed  was  subsisting  in  his  Divine 
nature.  No  change  was  effected,  or  could  be 
effected,  in  the  Godhead,  by  this  instru- 
ment, yet  its  inherence  in  the  Godhead  was 
perfect  and  complete ;  not  like  the  inherence 
of  any  other  being,  whose  existence  is  cre- 
ated and  preserved  by  the  sustaining  power  of 
the  Godhead, — but  an  inherence  of  such  a 
kind,  that  the  acts  performed  in  it  were  the 
acts  of  the  Godhead  done  through  this  me- 
dium. 

The  acts  of  other  intelligent  beings  are 
their  own  acts,  because  they  exist  each  as  a 
separate  person  ;  the  acts  of  this  nature  were 
not  separate  and  distinct  acts,  because  it  was 
not  separate  from  the  person  and  nature  of 
the  Godhead.  When  the  Godhead  exhibits 
itself  through  a  being  animate  or  inanimate, 
it  does  so  in  two  senses.  It  is  the  exhibition 
of  the  Godhead  according  to  the  nature  of 
the  being,  and  it  is  the  exhibition  of  the 
being  itself;  for  what  it  has,  is  given  to  it, 
and  becomes  in  it  qualities  of  itself,  and 
without  these  qualities  it  would  not  be  the 


OF    CHRIST.  199 

being  which  it  is ;  nor  would  it  be  constituted 
a  being.  The  qualities  which  it  possesses 
are  not  transferred  from  the  Divine  qualities, 
nor  are  they  an  infusion  of  them  so  that  the 
being  may  participate  in  them ;  but  they  are 
created  in,  and  with,  the  being,  to  render  it 
that  which  omnipotence  wills.  The  qualities 
of  being  are  greater  or  less,  more  or  less  glo- 
rious in  the  judgment  of  intelligent  creatures 
who  apprehend  them;  but  not  in  the  nature 
of  the  qualities  themselves.  For  each  qua- 
lity is,  per  se,  complete  and  perfect,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  object  which  possesses  it;  and 
the  estimate  of  the  excellence  of  the  beings 
depends  on  the  law  of  our  constitution, 
w^hich  enables  us  to  form  the  estimate,  not 
on  the  beings  themselves,  abstracted  or  de- 
tached from  us,  who  do  form  the  estimate. 
When  we  estimate  the  objects  of  the  uni- 
verse, we  recognize  certain  beings  of  more 
or  less  resplendent  qualities,  and  we,  accord- 
ingly, consider  these  qualities  as  more  or  less 
resplendent  exhibitions  of  Deity.  The  pre- 
dication of  exhibitions  of  the  Deity,  in  the 
qualities  of  creatures,  is  popular  language ; 
but  when  our  feelings  are  analyzed,  we  mere- 
ly discern  objects  which  the  law  of  our  con- 
stitution presents  to  our  judgment,  as   pos- 


200  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

sessing  qualities  of  greater  or  less  value, 
which  are  given  to  them  as  beings  complete 
in  themselves,  not  apportioned  from  the  qua- 
lities of  the  Divinity,  but  conferred  as  qua- 
lities by  the  Divinity,  when  exercising  its 
own  qualities.  When  we  say  such  an  object 
displays  the  Divine  perfections,  the  language 
is  popular,  but  not  strictly  true.  It  displays, 
in  reality,  its  own  perfections,  which  are  con- 
ferred by  the  Deity  in  the  exercise  of  his 
perfections ; — and  the  possession  of  such  per- 
fections by  the  object  evinces  the  posses- 
sion of  perfections  by  the  Deity.  The  object 
possesses  its  perfections  according  to  its  own 
nature,  and  the  Deity  possesses  his  perfec- 
tions according  to  his  nature.  Such  are  the 
objects  which  the  mind  of  man  may  contem- 
plate in  the  universe.  They  are  created  by 
the  Deity  to  be  beings  per  se,  when  created, 
i.  e.  complete  in  themselves,  separately  from 
all  other  beings :  this  is  their  constitution. 
They  have  qualities  in  accordance  with  this 
mode  of  being,  which  are  their  own  qualities, 
and  evince  that  they  are  the  work  of  the 
Deity  in  his  qualities.  They  exist  as  beings 
per  se,  by  the  preservation  or  continuity  which 
the  Deity  affords  them  in  their  original  con- 


OF    CHRIST.  201 

formation,   from  which  mode   of  confoniia- 
tion,  they  are  never  detached. 

But  there  is  one  object  in  the  universe, 
and  only  one,  of  which,  the  mode  of  being 
that  all  the  rest  have,  cannot  be  predicated. 
— This  is  the  human  nature  of  Christ.  All 
the  Divine  procedure  respecting  it  w^as  di- 
rected that  it  might  have  a  mode  of  being, 
different  from  all  other  beings  who,  in  Di- 
vine preservation,  continue  beings  per  se.  He 
who  possessed  this  human  nature,  said,  when 
coming  into  the  world,  "  a  body  hast  thou 
prepared  me."  It  was  created  and  born,  not 
to  be  as  other  beings,  but  for  a  peculiar  and 
distinct  purpose ;  therefore,  existence,  as  a 
being  per  se,  was  not  given  to  it.  Definite 
and  actual  existence  in  itself,  complete  from 
every  other  being,  cannot  be  predicated  of 
this  "  true  body  and  reasonable  soul."  For 
it  existed,  that  it  might  have  existence  af- 
filiated with,  and  real  in,  another  being.  It 
was  created ;  it  had  existence ;  it  acted  in 
another  manner  from  that  in  which  all  other 
creatures  are  created,  and  have  existence, 
and  do  act.  It  had  an  appearance  to  the 
senses  and  hitellect  of  man,  such  as  all  the 
beings  of  separate  existence  have.  It  seemed 
to   them  to  be  such   as   all  others  were, — 


202  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

But  its  real  de  facto ^  and  intrinsic  existence 
was  totally  different.  It  had  all  the  qualities 
which  other  beings  have ;  but  it  was  different 
in  its  mode  of  existence.  It  had  being,  and 
the  qualities  of  being,  in  the  state  in  which 
it  was ;  but  it  did  not  possess  the  constitu- 
tion of  other  beings  to  be,  in  itself,  existing 
separately  from  all  others.  An  intrinsic  con- 
stitution was  given  to  it,  which  was  given  to 
no  other  object,  viz.  the  faculty  of  being, 
but  not  of  being  an  existence  of  itself.  Its 
existence  was  in  the  Divine  nature;  yet  not 
in  the  Divine  nature,  generally,  but  in  that 
person,  who,  having  the  Divine  nature,  com- 
pletely, as  the  other  persons,  took  this  being 
into  union  or  junction  with  himself,  so  that 
it  might  exist  and  act  in  him.  The  exis- 
tence, which  other  objects  have  distinct  in 
themselves,  was  in  this  object,  perfect  and 
real,  in  that  Divine  person  for  whom  it  was 
formed — for  whom  it  possessed  this  peculi- 
arity of  intrinsic  constitution.  When  it  act- 
ed, its  acts  were  those  of  human  nature, 
which  it  was ;  but  its  acts  were  not  those  of 
a  person  or  being  existing  in  itself  separately 
from  all  others  :  they  were  the  acts  of  that 
being  whose  constitution  was  framed  so  that 
it  might  exist  in  another.     This  object  not 


OF    CHRIST.  203 

only  had  its  existence  in  the  Divine  person 
for  whom  it  was  formed,  but  it  had  de  facto 
union  with  that  person ;  so  that  its  qualities 
were  his  qualities;  its  actions  were  his  ac- 
tions. This  object,  which  had  its  existence 
in  him,  acted  by  him.  This  union  was  not 
any  intermixture  of  nature,  neither  was  it  a 
portion  of  the  one  nature  superadded  to  the 
other ;  but  it  was  the  possession  of  both  na- 
tures, the  Divine  and  human,  by  him  who 
w^as  a  person  eternally  in  the  Divine  nature. 

Actions  ma}^  be  predicated  of  the  human 
nature  which  have  reference  to  itself,  exist- 
ing in  Divinity ;  actions  may  be  predicated 
of  it,  with  reference  to  that  person  who  pos- 
sesses it.  When  actions  are  predicated  of 
the  human  nature  with  reference  to  itself, 
they  are  those  which  are  peculiar  to  human 
nature,  and  to  this  nature,  in  its  constitu- 
tionallv  ditferent  mode  of  existence:  when 
actions  are  predicated  of  it  with  respect  to 
the  person  who  possesses  it,  they  are  those 
of  that  person.  When  our  Lord  says,  in  the 
4th  verse  of  the  xviith  chap,  of  John,  "  / 
have  glorified  thee  on  the  earth:  I  have  finished 
the  ivork  ivhich  thou  gavest  me  to  do,^^  lie 
speaks  of  the  actions  of  his  human  nature  in 
itself.     When  he  says,   (v.  5th  and  24th  of 


204       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

the  same  chapter,)  "  And  noiv,  O  Father, 
glorify  thou  me  with  thine  ownself,  with  the 
glory  ivhich  I  had  with  thee  before  the  xoorld 
ivas''^ — and,  "/or  thou  lovedst  7ne  before  the 
foundation  of  the  ivorld,^'' — he  speaks  of  him- 
self, as  the  person  in  whom  this  human  na- 
ture was.  The  expressions  "  glory  which  I 
had  with  thee  before  the  world  was,"  and, 
"  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world,"  must  refer  to  a  glory  and  love  distinct 
from  his  possession  of  humanity;  for  they 
must  have  been  actually  existing  at  the  pe- 
riod to  which  our  Lord  refers.  It  cannot 
be  said  that  this  love  of  the  Father  and  of 
the  Son  existed  in  decree,  and  respected  his 
humanity  when  assumed ;  because  love  is  an 
active,  energetic  principle,  subsisting  between 
two  objects.  Love  in  decree  is  a  resolve 
that  love  shall  subsequently  exist,  at  the  pe- 
riod resolved  in  the  decree ;  but  this  is  not 
love  de  facto  in  existence ;  it  is  love  to  be, 
but  not  in  being.  Our  Lord  says,  that  be- 
fore the  foundation  of  the  world,  there  were 
two  persons,  reciprocally  loving  and  loved ; 
"  thou  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world." — The  act  of  loving  which  is 
here  described,  is  not  a  decree  to  love,  in 
which  latter  case,   the  love   is  dormant,   or 


OF   CHRIST.  205 

not  in  being,  until  the  event  decreed  is  de- 
veloped,— but  a  real  and  substantial  quality 
possessed   and   exercised   by   a  person,   and 
existing   in   that   person   before    this   world. 
The  Son,  therefore,  independently  of  his  as- 
sumed humanity,  declares  that  there  was  a 
love  subsisting  between  the  Father  and  him. 
Now,  that  love,  which  was  before  this  world, 
subsisted  between  the  Father  and  the  person 
who   then  addressed   the  Father.      He   ad- 
dressed him  as  a  person  being  in  the  related 
state  of  Son  to  the  Father,  and,  in  this  state, 
the  love  was  reciprocal,  and  enjoyed  by  these 
persons.     He  was  in  the  state  of  Son,  when 
he  declared  the  existence  of  this  love;  and 
on  him  Avho  spake  and  was  Son,  this  love 
was  fixed  before  creation.     It  is  impossible 
for  legitimate  ingenuity  to  affix,  by  any  con- 
struction, a  different  meaning  to  this  decla- 
ration.    If  the   Son,    in  his  related  state  of 
Son,   enjoyed  love   with  the  Father,   before 
creation,  and  if  there  existed  this  mutual  com- 
placency  between   these    two  persons, — the 
Son  must  be  like  his  quality,  independent  of 
creatures,  and,  therefore.  Eternal. 

He  also  possessed  "  glory  with  the  Father 
before  the  world  was."     The  notion  of  glory 
is  originally  derived  from  that  concentration 
18 


206        THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIF 

of  the  rajs  of  light  which  produces  a  vivid 
appearance  to  the  senses,  and  is  obtained  by 
a  comparison  of  this,  with  other  appearances 
less  vivid.  Glory  is  transferred  from  sensible 
objects,  and  is  figuratively  applied  to  the 
mind,  when  its  energies  produce  a  vivid  emo- 
tion in  those  minds  which  contemplate  its 
powers,  and  when  this  notion  is  derived  from 
a  comparison  with  less  splendid  energies. — 
Hence,  glory,  stript  of  the  false  associa- 
tions which  men  have  connected  with  the 
term,  is  the  exercise  of  qualities  in  well  re- 
gulated minds,  which  excite  veneration  and 
admiration  in  other  well  regulated  minds. 
The  glory  of  the  Godhead,  in  creation,  is  the 
qualities  which  it  has  conferred  by  the  exer- 
cise of  its  own  qualities.  The  glory  of  the 
Godhead,  in  itself,  or  existing  between  the 
Divine  persons,  must  be  the  mutual  posses- 
sion of  Divine  perfections,  as  they  inhere  in 
the  Godhead.  None  could  have  glory  with 
a  Divine  person  before  the  world  was,  except 
a  Divine  person ;  as  the  nature  of  Divine  per- 
sons can  be  rendered  neither  more  nor  less 
excellent  by  their  self  existence, — that  which 
they  mutually  possess  as  glory  is  the  perfec- 
tions essential  to  the  Deity.  In  the  state  in 
which  he  then  was,  that  of  Son,  he  declares 


OF    CHRIST.  207 

ihat  he  had  glory  or  the  possession  of  Divine 
perfections  with  the  Father.  This  glory  is, 
therefore,  essential  to  the  person  speaking, 
who  is  the  Son ;  for  that  which  is  essential  to 
a  Divine  person,  must  always  belong  to  him 
in  that  state  in  which  he  is  Divine.  The 
Son,  before  creation,  possessed  all  Divine  per- 
iections ;  he  is,  therefore,  essential  and  eter- 
nal Son. 

The  observations  which  we  have  made  on 
the  person  of  Christ  possessing  the  Divine 
and  human  natures,  will  enable  the  reader 
10  apply  them  to  those  passages  in  the  mter- 
cessory  prayer,  that  respect  the  actions  of 
the  human  nature  existing  in  the  Divine,  and 
to  those  that  respect  the  person  possessing 
both  Divine  and  human  natures.  There  is 
only  one  passage  which  it  may  be  requisite 
for  us  to  examine  in  consequence  of  the  per- 
verted explanations  that  have  been  given  of 
its  meaning.  John  xvii.  3.  *•  And  this  is  life 
eternal,  that  they  might  knoiv  thee,  the  only 
true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou  hast 
sent,^^ 

Christ  commences  his  address  by  the  de- 
claration of  himself  in  the  person  of  Son,  and, 
in  this  capacity,  he  continues  the  address  to 
its  conclusion.     The  knowledge  of  the  Fa- 


208       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

ther  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  who 
is  sent  by  the  Father,  is  declared  to  be  eter- 
nal life,  i.  e.  this  knowledge  and  the  con- 
duct consequent  on  it. — When  we  analyze 
the  expression,  we  discover  a  knowledge 
which  is  to  be  possessed  by  a  rational  being ; 
w^e  discover  the  objects  of  this  knowledge, 
the  Father  and  Jesus  Christ.  The  former 
is  spoken  of  in  his  absolute  state ;  the  lat- 
ter not  only  in  existence,  but  as  he  exists 
when  sent.  There  is,  therefore,  ^  marked 
difference  in  the  medium  of  our  knowledge 
of  these  objects ;  for  the  one  is  spoken  of 
only  as  existing,  and  the  other  as  existing 
when  sent  to  us.  The  object  who  is  sent 
is  declared  to  be  Jesus  Christ.  These  two 
designations  are  the  names  given  to  the  hu- 
man nature  of  our  Lord ;  one  of  them  was 
announced  by  the  angel,  in  his  message  to 
the  Virgin,  and  the  other  was  foretold  in  an- 
cient prophecy.  Our  Lord  digresses  from 
the  state  of  his  person  as  Son, — in  which  he 
commences  and    subsequently   continues   his 

address, by   the   mention   of  that   nature 

which  had  existence  in  his  person.  This 
digression  cannot  be  the  effect  of  accident; 
it  must  be  for  some  specific  purpose,  and 
evidently  alludes  to  his  human  nature,  which 


OF    CHRIST.  209 

had  not  Sonship  in  itself,  and  which  did  not 
eternally  exist  in  the  state  of  Son.  He  de- 
clares the  knowledge  of  this  human  nature, 
— Jesus  Christ  as  he  was  sent, — to  be  eter- 
nal life.  Now,  the  human  nature  of  our 
Lord  was  both  an  object  of  knowledge  and  a 
medium  of  knowledge  by  which  the  Father 
might  be  apprehended.  His  human  nature 
could  be  known,  because  it  was  an  object  of 
sensation  and  intellectual  feeling,  when  it  was 
sent  among  men.  By  its  very  constitution, 
it  could  not  have  separate  existence  from  the 
Son,  in  union  with  whom  it  was.  Correct 
knowledge  of  it,  led  to  the  knowledge  of  that 
person  with  whom  it  was  in  union  ;  and  such 
knowledge  necessarily  led  to  that  of  the  other 
Divine  persons.  It  was,  therefore,  an  object 
on  ^vhich  the  knowledge  of  man  might  be  ex- 
ercised, and  it  was  a  medium  by  which  the 
knowledge  of  the  Godhead  might  be  attained. 
The  knowledge  of  this  nature  which  was  sent, 
comprehends,  within  it,  our  duty  to  God  and 
our  duty  to  man.  It  comprehends  our  duty 
to  God ;  for  we  are  thereby  led  to  ascertain 
that  Divine  person  in  whom  this  nature 
subsisted,  and  who  enabled  it  to  perform 
all  duty  to  God.  It  was  really  a  being,— 
though  its  original  constitution  was  different 
18* 


210       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

from  all  others,  having  no  separate  exis- 
tence of  its  own, — and  though  it  performed, 
through  its  Divine  person ^  all  duty  to  man. 
Benevolence  shone  through  all  its  acts  ;  mer- 
cy breathed  in  its  voice ;  kindness  beamed 
through  its  looks.  This  nature  exhibited,  in 
perfection,  the  duty  of  the  individual,  of  the 
son,  of  the  neighbour,  of  the  master,  of  the 
friend,  of  the  citizen.  Its  perseverance  was 
undeviating,  as  its  purposes  were  just.  Er- 
ror did  not  sully  its  wisdom ;  weakness  did 
not  form  a  contrast  to  its  power ;  guilt  did 
not  spot  its  purity.  The  human  nature  of 
our  Lord  did  not  possess  the  constitution  of 
existing  separately,  for  this  express  reason, 
viz.  that  it  might  exist  far  more  gloriously 
than  it  could  have  done  separately.  Hence, 
when  exalted,  it  exists  in  a  constellation  of 
glories,  more  illustrious  than  any  being  in  the 
universe  can  possess.  It  has  the  utmost  ex- 
tent of  perfections  resident  within  it ;  for  all 
the  perfections  of  Godhead  are  exerted  upon 
it,  that  it  may  pour  forth  a  flood  of  perfec- 
tions more  eifulgently  than  any  other  created 
being.  It  is  a  central  existence,  where  the 
Godhead,  the  angels,  glorified  spirits,  and 
good  men,  meet.  It  is  the  vehicle  of  union, 
by  w^hich  men  who  have  departed  from  God, 


OF    CHRIST.  211 

may  return  to  him.  It  is  an  adaptation  which 
meets  the  wants,  and  removes  the  crimes,  of 
countless  myriads.  It  is  that  bright  and  be- 
nevolent object,  before  which  the  darkness  of 
crime,  and  the  sorrows  of  earth,  shall  disap- 
pear. It  is  the  Sheckinah  of  heaven ;  for  in 
it  the  Godhead  manifests  its  presence.  It 
possesses  the  principle  which  obliterates  the 
principles  of  evil,  and  expands  the  principles 
of  good.  It  has  undergone  the  vicissitudes  of 
earth,  and  enjoys  the  raptures  of  heaven. 
From  it  flows  an  "  exceeding  and  eternal 
weight  of  glory,"  w  hich  is  laid  up  for  the  just 
in  other  scenes.  It  has  expelled  the  princi- 
ples of  sin,  that  men  might  dwell  with  God — 
that  God  might  be  their  God,  and  they  his 
people.  It  is  the  "  all  in  all"  to  celestial  and 
terrestrial  beings.  It  kindles  within  men's 
souls  the  warmth  of  devotion  which  was  ex- 
tinguished by  sin — restores  them  to  that  com- 
munity from  which  they  have  estranged 
themselves — brings  them  within  the  circle 
of  that  family  from  which  they  have  strayed 
— and  procures  them  pardon  for  that  rebel- 
lious conduct  by  which  they  have  broken 
their  fealty  to  their  Governor.  Through  the 
abundance  of  its  merits,  and  from  the  influ- 
ences which  it  imparts,  the  sorows  of  life  are 


212       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

alleviated  and  sweetened — its  joys  are  en- 
hanced; the  gloom  which  shrouded  eternity 
from  time  is  removed,  and  the  intellectual 
vision  extends  to  those  scenes  where  the  vir- 
tuous of  this  world  enjoy  "  rest  from  their 
labours,  and  their  works  do  follow  them." 
It  has,  in  one  word,  "  finished  the  transgres- 
sion, made  an  end  of  sins,  made  reconciliation 
for  iniquity,  and  brought  in  everlasting  righ- 
teousness." 

Transcendent  as  these  qualities  and  ac- 
tions of  our  Lord's  humanity  are,  they  are 
only  those  of  a  creature  deriving  efficacy 
from  its  union  with  a  Divine  person,  and 
must  be  distinguished  from  the  essential  qua- 
lities and  acts  of  the  person  of  the  Son,  to 
whom  this  nature  belongs.  Now,  eternal 
life,  or  a  life  of  continued  happiness  without 
any  cessation  of  existence,  is  declared  to  be 
the  property  of  those  who  have  knowledge 
of  "  the  Father  the  only  true  God,  and 
Jesus  Christ  whom  he  has  sent."  But  the 
same  advantage  cannot  flow  from  the  God- 
head and  from  any  creature,  at  one  and  the 
same  time,  or  at  any  time.  For  this  would 
be  to  affirm  that  the  creature  is  equal  to  the 
Godhead  in  power,  and  that  it  also  posses- 
ses self-existent,   or  inherent  and  uiiderived 


OF    CHRIST.  213 

being,   seeing  it   can  do   that  which   is  pe- 
culiar to  underived  power.      If  it  confer  ad- 
vantage  only  as   an  instrument,    then,    the 
advantage    is    not    primarily    derived    from 
it,  but  is  referable,  in  reality,  to  him   from 
whom   the   creature    derived   the    power   of 
conferring  the  advantage.     Hence,  when  the 
Son  says,  in   the   2d  verse,  "  As  thou  hast 
given  him  power  over  all  fleshy  that  he  should 
give  eternal  life  to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given 
him^'''^ — he  evidently  alludes  to  the  delegated 
power  which  was  given  him  in  his  human  na- 
ture ;   which  nature,  being  a  creature,    could 
possess  no  power  but  what  was  delegated  or 
given  to  it.     The  power  of  the  Son  to  confer 
advantage  is,  therefore,  of  tw  o  sorts ;  the  one 
is  inherent  and  peculiar  to  his  Divinity,  the 
other  is  derived,  and  delegated  to   that  na- 
ture which  could  alone  possess  power  in  this 
manner.     His  human  nature  is  not  the  source 
of  the  power  which  gives  eternal  life,  but  it 
is  the  appointed  channel  through  which  the 
essential  power  of  the  Son  flows.     The  hu- 
man nature  has  this  derived  power,  that  it 
might    disseminate    its   influences    to    those 
who  are  of  like  nature  with  itself.     This  de- 
legated power  in  our  Lord's   human    nature 
scatters  its  resources,  as  a  mighty  ocean,  to 


214  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

fructify,  invigorate,  and  enliven  those  whom 
it  surrounds.  In  the  effects  of  this  dele- 
gated power,  we  recognize  collateral  propriety 
and  benefits,  which  we  can  discern  in  no  other 
conceivable  arrangement.  The  human  na- 
ture of  Christ  is  congenial  with  that  of  those 
who  are  the  immediate  objects  of  his  power. 
It  possesses  feelings  essentially  the  same  in 
kind,  though  infinitely  more  exalted  in  de- 
gree. It  has  a  fellow  feeling  in  their  suffer- 
ings and  wants  ;  it  has  a  sympathetic  union  of 
desires  with  them.  It  wishes  that  they  shall 
be  as  it  is,  as  far  as  their  natures  will  permit. 
It  infuses  a  confidence,  "  a  holy  boldness" 
into  those  who  require  its  aid,  that  could  not 
otherwise  have  been  obtained. — The  princi- 
ple which  this  delegated  power  of  giving  eter- 
nal life  is  to  produce,  is  the  know  ledge  of  the 
Father,  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ 
whom  he  has  sent.  Now,  the  knowledge  of 
the  Father,  who  is  the  only  true  God,  is  de- 
clared to  be  collateral  with  the  knowledge  of 
Jesus  Christ.  The  knowledge  of  the  only 
true  God  and  of  a  creature,  cannot,  equally, 
be  the  means  of  eternal  life.  For  then,  our 
knowledge  of  the  one  would  be  productive  of 
equal  advantage  with  our  knowledge  of  the 
other,    and   effect  the   same   results.      This 


OF    CHRIST.  215 

would  prove  the  objects  of  knowledge  and 
their  qualities  to  be  the  same.  But  this  is 
absurd ;  for  we  have  designated  the  one  ob- 
ject God,  and  the  other  creature.  Jesus  Christ, 
w^ho  is  sent,  cannot,  therefore,  be  only  a 
creature,  he  must  be  more  than  a  creature; 
yet,  the  nature  which  he  had  in  the  flesh, 
was  necessarily  a  creature.  Real  knowledge 
of  him  must  include  his  Godhead,  in  which 
the  human  nature  dwelt,  and  w  hich  cannot  be 
separated  from  that  nature  after  its  assump- 
tion. When  the  Father  is  termed  the  only 
true  God,  his  Divine  nature  is  meant,  which 
is  the  only  true  God.  But  the  Son  is  in  that 
Divine  nature,  as  well  as  the  Father,  and 
both  persons,  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  are  the 
only  true  God.  The  medium  by  which  we 
obtain  this  knowledge  is  the  human  nature  of 
our  Lord,  and  this  human  nature  cannot  be 
known,  unless  we  also  know  the  person  who 
possesses  it.  There,  therefore,  can  be  no 
knowledge  of  the  only  true  God,  unless 
through  this  human  nature.  There  is  a 
beautiful  descending  and  ascending  series  of 
circumstances  in  this  exhibition  of  the  God- 
head. All  power,  even  the  power  of  eternal 
life  which  inheres  essentially  in  the  persons  of 
the  Godhead,  is  communicated  and  delegated 


216  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

to  the  humanity  which  has  existence  in  the 
Son  ;  from  this  humanity,  eternal  life  is  giv  en 
to  all  flesh  belonging  to  the  Son ;  the  eternal 
life  which  he  gives  is  obtained  through  the 
knowledge  infused  into  those  who  are  the 
Son's  redeemed.  This  knowledge  is  fixed  on 
the  humanity  of  the  Son,  where  delegated 
eternal  life  resides  ;  and  from  the  humanity  it 
ascends  to  the  person  of  the  Son. — to  the  Fa- 
ther— to  the  Godhead.  Stupendous  heights 
have  been  reached  by  the  intellect  of  man, 
but  this  is  a  surpassing  knowledge,  which  will 
afford  employment  to  immortal  intellect ! 

This  knowledge  is  not  the  raving  of  en- 
thusiasm, nor  the  dogmatism  of  bigotry, — 
but  that  which  rises 

"  Fi'om  Nature,  up  to  Nature's  God." 

On  earth  it  infuses  the  best  feelings,  the  most 
virtuous  emotions.  It  kindles  a  glow  of  gra- 
titude which  shall  expand  through  eternity  ; 
it  divests  the  mind  of  dark  and  gloomy  ap- 
prehensions, and  enables  us  to  survey  crea- 
tion's grandeur  with  that  sublimity  of  soul, 
which  the  knowledge  of  the  union  of  the  Son, 
in  our  nature,  excites.  It  elevates  the  con- 
ception to  the  real  greatness  of  our  nature, 
which  consists  in  just  apprehensions  of  the 
nature  allied  to  God,  and  which  is  with  God. 


OF    CHRIST.  217 

This  knowledge  is  the  object  of  the  Apostle's 
prayer,  when  he  says,  Ephesians  iii.  17. 
"  That  Christ  may  dwell  in  your  hearts  by 
faith;  that  ye,  being  rooted  and  grounded 
in  love,  may  be  able  to  comprehend  with  all 
saints,  what  is  the  breadth,  and  length,  and 
depth,  and  height ;  and  to  know^  the  love  of 
Christ,  which  passeth  knowledge,  that  ye 
might  be  filled  with  all  the  fulness  of  God." 


19 


218       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 


CHAPTER  IX. 


General  Observations  on  Passages  of  Scrip- 
ture^ declaring  the  Eternal  Sonship  of  our 
Lord, 

We  have  now  scrutinized  those  passages  of 
Scripture,  in  which  the  Sonship  of  Christ  is 
the  subject  of  express  examination  and  expli- 
cit announcement, — in  which,  it  is  not  merely 
mentioned,  but  commented  upon  as  a  fact 
to  be  illustrated.  In  many  other  portions  of 
the  Sacred  Volume,  the  same  truth  is  deci- 
sively stated ; — sometimes  as  the  subject  of 
especial  declaration ;  sometimes  as  an  inci- 
dental remark  illustrative  of  other  positions, 
but,  in  all  cases,  confirmatory  of  the  expla- 
nation which  we  have  given  of  the  texts  dis- 
cussed in  the  preceding  chapters.  These,  we 
have  found,  after  just  explication,  uniformly 
declare  the  everlasting  state  of  the  person  in 
the  Godhead  termed  Son,  to  be  his  related 
state  in  the  Divine  nature  to  the  person  who 


OF    CHRIST.  219 

is  termed  Father.  Accordingly,  as  the  writer 
of  the  passages  which  we  are  about  to  consi- 
der, meant  more  immediately  to  proclaim  the 
Sonship,  or  wished  simply  to  adduce  the  fact 
as  explanatory  of  the  context,  his  language  is 
more  or  less  forcible. 

The  declaration  of  our  Lord's  Sonship,  in 
his  related  state  to  the  Father,  is  stated  w^ith 
peculiar  precision,  in  John  i.  14.  "  And  the 
Word  tvas  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us, 
(and  ive  beheld  his  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the 
only  begotten  of  the  Father,)  full  of  grace  and 
truth.  18.  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any 
time;  the  only-begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him.^^ 
John  iii.  16 — 18.  *'  For  God  so  loved  the 
ivorld,  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that 
ivhosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish, 
but  have  everlasting  life.  For  God  sent  not 
his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the  ivorld; 
but  that  the  ivorld  through  him  might  be  saved. 
He  that  believeth  on  him  is  not  condemjied  : 
but  he  that  believeth  not  is  condemned  al- 
ready, because  he  hath  7iot  believed  in  the 
name  of  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God.^^  1 
John  iv.  9.  "  In  this  was  manifested  the  love 
of  God  towards  us,  because  that  God  sent  his 


220       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

only-begotten   Son  into   the  ivorld,   thai    ivt: 
7night  live  through  him.''^ 

These  passages  declare  our  Lord  to  be 
the  only-begotten  of  the  Father — the  only-be- 
gotten Son  of  the  Father — the  only-begotten 
Son  of  God.  "The  Word''  which  "was 
with  God,''  "^the  Word"  which  "  was  God" 
possessed  glory,  that  it  became  the  only-be- 
gotten of  the  Father  to  exhibit,  in  his  manifes- 
tation in  the  flesh,  which  was  beheld  by  men. 
None  will  affirm  that  the  apostles  or  others 
beheld  the  essential  glory  of  the  Word ;  nei- 
ther could  they  behold  the  essential  glory  of 
the  only-begotten,  which  is  declared  to  be 
the  same  as  the  glory  of  tlte  Word, — they 
could  only  behold  its  exhibitions  through  its 
assumed  nature.  The  only-begotten  Son  of 
the  Father  is  announced  to  be  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  This  is  descriptive  of  the 
union  of  nature  and  of  consequent  counsel 
and  design,  and  especially  of  complacency 
subsisting  between  these  persons.  Campbell, 
on  the  words  "  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father," 
says,  "  By  the  expression  'o  uv  ug  rov  koKttom 
"  T»  TTfltT^of,  is  meant,  not  only,  '  who  is  the 
"  '  special  object  of  the  Father's  love,'  but 
"  *  who  is  admitted  to  his  most  secret  coun- 
"  '  sels.'  "     Macknight  observes  on  this  ex- 


OF    CHRIST.  221 

pression,  "  To  be  in  one^s  bosom  denotes  the 
"  greatest  familiarity  and  intimacy ;  a  com- 
"  munication  of  counsels  and  designs  ;  an  en- 
"  tire  and  tender  affection."  Language  can- 
not convey  in  stronger  words  the  existence  of 
the  only-begotten  Son  of  the  Father  in  the 
Godhead.  If  the  expression  Son,  be  a  mere 
title  conveying  no  relation  to  the  person  who 
is  Father, — terms  must  cease  to  include  mean- 
ing, and  be  stript  of  the  property  of  including 
rational  ideas.  Could  such  expressions  be 
used,  in  any  other  case,  where  an  unbiassed 
mind  would  not  instantly  affix  the  notion  of  a 
related  state  between  persons  thus  described  ? 
— Could  an  unprejudiced  mind  adopt  any 
other  conclusion  ?  The  love  of  the  person  of 
the  Father,  and  complete  participation  in  his 
counsels  and  designs,  are  attributed  to  the 
only-begotten  Son.  If  there  were  not  the 
Son  eternally  enjoying  this  love,  and  parti- 
cipating in  these  counsels  and  designs,  there 
never  was  the  Eternal  Father  loving,  coun- 
selling, and  designing.  This  is  the  utmost 
verge  of  knowledge  which  the  human  intel- 
lect is  permitted  to  apprehend.  When  it 
has  explored  creation  and  creation's  laws — 
when  it  has  risen  to  higher  contemplations 
than  the  investigation  of  matter  can  elicit — 
19* 


/ 


222  THE    ETERISAL    SO>bHIP 

when  it  has  surveyed  farther  than  planets 
roll  or  spheres  glitter — when  it  has  exhaust- 
ed the  wonders  of  the  telescope  and  micro- 
scope— when  it  has  studied  the  soul,  whose 
powers  have  directed  these  pursuits — when 
it  has  left  the  observation  of  kindred  minds, 
and  learned  what  is  announced  of  the  ranks 
of  the  pure  spirits — when  it  has,  in  thought, 
ascended  to  the  illimitable  vastness  of  God- 
head,— it  is  permitted  to  know  that  harmony 
active,  energetic,  eternal,  subsists  therein,  en- 
joyed between  the  adorable  persons,  the  Fa- 
ther and  the  Son ! 

In  our  nature  complacency  is  the  sweet, 
refreshing  influence  which  hallows  enjoy- 
ment, which  is  the  unison  of  the  mental 
powers,  which  introduces  repose  from  all 
that  is  harassing,  and  a  soul-felt  intensity 
of  delight.  The  mind  is  alive  to  enjoyment, 
and  misery  is  hushed.  It  feels  the  floAv  of 
what  is  good,  and  the  retrocession  of  what 
is  evil.  Existence  is  experienced  more  alertly, 
more  gladly,  more  exquisitely.  The  periods 
when  we  were  without  this  feeling  were, 
in  our  estimation,  either  those  of  tempes- 
tuous confusion,  or  the  dull,  dead  level  where 
emotions  are  absorbed  in  vacancy.— In  com- 
placency w^e  feel  joy ;  we  wish  joys  to  be 


OF    CHRIST,  223 

felt  by  all.  The  very  ardour  of  our  happi- 
ness longs  for  a  congeniality  of  feeling  and 
sentiment.  The  aspect  of  creation  is  more 
pleasing.  For  us,  the  sun  shines  brighter, 
and  the  earth  gives  its  thousand  sweets  more 
lovely.  We  act  better  ;  we  think  better  ;  w^e 
are  better.  We  long  to  enjoy  this  for  ever! 
We  hold  communion  with  those  suited  for 
happier,  purer  scenes.  We  wish  for  the  time 
w  hen  this  complacency  shall  be  warmer — 
when  communion  of  soul  shall  be  dearer — 
when  we  shall  increase  in  the  expanse  of  this 
feeling.  Such  is  the  complacency  of  men. — 
But,  in  the  Godhead,  complacency  is  unde- 
finable,  because  it  is  immense, — vast  as  the 
Being  in  whom  it  dwells,- — vast  in  the  nature 
of  him  who  "  iilleth  all  in  all," — vast  in  that 
boundless  expanse  of  delight,  from  whose 
stores  angels'  joys  have  flowed,  man's  delights 
have  been  given.  There — is  the  only-begot- 
ten Son,  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father.  He 
sees  him ;  he  is  with  him  :  he  is  God. 

Unbelief  in  the  name  of  the  only-begot- 
ten Son  of  God  is  the  cause  of  condemna- 
tion. Among  the  different  meanings  of  name, 
in  Scripture,  when  applied  to  God,  is  that  of 
his  nature  and  attributes,  which  are  peculi- 
arly  employed   when   he   is   propounded  to 


224  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

those  who  are  ignorant  of  him.  As  the  Jews 
refused  to  acknowledge  Christ  to  be  the  Son 
of  God,  when  he  was  propounded  to  them 
in  a  miraculous  manner,  their  condemnation 
was  just. 

But  it  may  be  urged,  are  not  men  said  to 
be  begotten  of  God  ?  are  they  not  peculiarly 
called  his  children  and  his  sons?  nay,  are 
they  not  said  to  be  begotten  of  those  apostles 
and  ministers  who  are  sent  by  God  ?  and  if 
these  expressions  be  figurative,  why  may  not 
the  expression  be  also  figurative  when  applied 
to  the  persons  in  the  Godhead  ?  We  shall  an- 
swer this  objection. 

I.  There  is  an  actual  description  given 
of  the  nature  of  the  birth  of  those  who  are 
styled  begotten  of  God.  John  iii.  6 — 7. 
"  Jesus  answered.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
thee,  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of 
the  spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  God.  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is 
flesh  ;  and  that  which  is  born  of  the- Spirit  is 
spirit.  Marvel  not  that  I  said  unto  thee.  Ye 
must  be  born  again."  This  passage  gives 
a  delineation  of  the  commencement  of  the 
sonship  of  men ;  there  is,  however,  no  descrip- 
tion of  the  commencement  of  the  mode  hy 
which  the  person  termed  Son  did  become  Son. 


OF    CHRIST.  225 

II.  The  mode  by  which  men  become 
figuratively  begotten  of  God  is  by  a  change 
of  their  moral  principle — by  the  introduc- 
tion of  virtuous  principles  guiding  their 
minds,  and  by  the  overthrow  of  evil  princi- 
ples ^^hich  formerly  swayed  them.  But  such 
change  was  impossible  in  him  who  is  "  holy, 
harmless,  undefiled,  separate  from  sinners," 
in  his  human  nature,  and  who,  in  his  Divine 
nature,  cannot  change.  Men  become  the  sons 
of  God  in  consequence  of  a  change  effected 
in  their  nature ;  the  change  is  real ;  their 
state  of  sonship  is  figurative.  *'  In  this  the 
children  of  God  are  manifest,  and  the  children 
of  the  devil ;  whosoever  doth  not  righteous- 
ness, is  not  of  God,  neither  he  that  loveth 
not  his  brother."  But  the  same  state,  in  this 
instance  that  of  Son,  cannot  be  predicated 
either  figuratively  or  really  of  objects  that  are 
essentially  different;  one  of  which — man — 
must  change  in  his  nature,  by  obtaining  dif- 
ferent principles,  that  he  may  be  in  the  state 
predicated;  and  the  other — our  Lord — cannot 
change,  and,  therefore,  cannot,  at  any  sub- 
sequent period,  be  in  a  state  different  from 
what  he  was  at  a  former  period.  These  ob- 
jects, therefore,  can  never  be  in  any  state  in 
the  same  sense,  or  in  the  same  mode.     Men 


226  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

are  rendered  figuratively  the  sons  of  God, 
through,  or  by  the  medium  of,  change :  our 
Lord  can  never  be  rendered  Son  through  any 
change.  In  the  sense  in  which  men  are  be- 
gotten of  God,  our  Lord  cannot  be  begotten. 

in.  Men  become  the  sons  of  God,  at  de-. 
finite  periods  of  their  lives,  when  they  re- 
nounce the  "  works  of  the  flesh,"  and  "  live 
after  the  Spirit;" — we  can  fix  the  time  when 
they  were  not  the  sons  of  God.  But  there 
can  be  no  time  specified  in  which  our  Lord 
was  not  the  Son  of  God.  This  term  is  coeval 
with  his  existence  ;  even  if  we  regard  only 
the  human  nature.  The  state  of  men  and 
of  our  Lord  in  being  begotten  sons  cannot 
be  compared — cannot  originate  from  the  same 
circumstances — cannot  be  in  the  same  man- 
ner, because  the  figurative  sonship  of  the  for- 
mer is  an  event  which  occurs  during  their  lives ; 
the  Sonship  of  the  latter  is  collateral  with  his 
being,  even  when  we  refer  only  to  his  huma- 
nity. 

IV.  A  person  can  only  be  termed  son 
figuratively  or  really.  If  he  be  son  really, 
such  filiation  only  exists  by  participation  of 
nature  with  him  to  whom  he  is  Son.  It  is 
admitted  that  men  are  only  sons  of  God 
figuratively.     Now,  Christ  is  not  Son  as  they 


OF   CHRIST.  227 

are  sons,  for  he  is  styled  the  onhj-hegotten  Son 
of  God;  which  expression  necessarily  ex- 
cludes the  sonship  of  all  others  in  the  mode 
in  which  he  is  Son.  No  one  can  alone  pos- 
sess that  which  thousands  of  others  have.  No 
one  can  alone  be  that  which  thousands  of 
others  are.  Many  are  the  begotten  sons  of 
God;  but  they  are  sons  figuratively.  He, 
who  is  the  only  begotten  Son,  cannot  be  Son 
figuratively,  seeing  many  else  are  sons  figu- 
ratively;  he  must,  therefore, '  be  Son  really, 
i.  e.  he  must  participate  in  the  nature  of  him 
to  whom  he  is  Son.  The  observations  of 
Macknight  are  so  excellent  on  this  subject, 
that  we  shall  transcribe  his  note  on  1  John 
iv.  9. — "  because  that  God  sent  his  only  be- 
gotten Son  into  the  world,"  &c.  v-  9.  "  By 
"  this  the  love  of  God  was  manifested^  that 
*'  God  sent,  &:c.  This  is  an  allusion  to  our 
"  Lord's  words,  John  iii.  16.  God  so  loved 
"  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten 
"  Son,  that  lohosoever  helievcth  in  him  should 
''  not  perish,  hut  have  everlasting  life,  Christ 
"  is  called  God's  only-begotten  Son,  to  dis- 
"  tinguish  him  from  all  others  who  in  Scrip- 
"  ture  are  called  the  sons  of  God;  and  to 
"  heighten  our  idea  of  God's  love  to  us  in 
"  giving  a  person  of  such  dignity,  and  so  be- 


228  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

"  loved  of  God,  to  die  for  us.  It  is  supposed 
"  that  by  giving  Christ  the  title  of  God^s  only- 
''  begotten  Son  in  this  passage,  the  Apostle 
"  intended  to  overturn  the  error  of  Ebion 
"  and  Cerinthus,  who  affirmed  that  Christ 
"Avas  not  God's  Son  hy  nature^  but  that, 
'*  like  otlK3r  good  men,  he  was  honoured  with 
"  the  title  of  God's  Son,  on  account  of  his 
^*  virtues  :  in  which  opinion  these  heresiarchs 
"  have  been  followed  by  some  in  modern 
"  times.  They,  however,  who  hold  this  opi- 
"  nion,  ought  to  show  a  reason  why  the  epi- 
"  thet  of  the  only-hegotten  is  appropriated  to 
"  Christ." 

We  have  thus  evinced  the  impossibility 
of  our  Lord's  being  begotten  of  the  Father, 
in  the  same  manner  in  which  men  are  the 
begotten,  and  sons  of  God.  The  filiation  of 
nature  which  our  Lord  possesses  with  the 
Father,  was  the  subject  of  explicit  declara- 
tion, in  order  that  the  Church  might,  in  all 
ages,  have  an  express  and  unerring  appre- 
hension of  those  persons  in  the  Godhead, 
whose  existence  is  that  of  the  Godhead  it- 
self. The  subject  is  peculiarly  liable  to  mis- 
construction, on  account  of  the  weakness  of 
our  intellect,  and  the  defective  state  of  our 
sources  of  knowledge.     There  is  a  pre-dispo- 


OF    CHRIST.  229 

sitioii  to  wrong  apprehensions,  not  in  the 
constitution  of  the  soul  itself,  but  in  the  in- 
formation which  we  obtain  through  the  me- 
dium of  our  senses,  when  engaged  in  the 
consideration  of  objects  purely  intellectual. 
That  the  liability  of  our  knowledge  to  per- 
version might  not  mislead  us,  in  this  most 
interesting  of  all  examinations,  our  Lord  is 
expressly  termed  the  only-begotten  Son,  to 
exclude  all  sonship  from  comparison  with  his 
Sonship — to  reveal  to  his  Church  the  real 
state  of  the  Divine  nature — to  show  them  the 
everlasting  stability  of  their  hopes  and  ex- 
pectations— to  exhibit  not  only  what  he  has 
done,  in  that  nature  which  was  the  means  of 
salvation,  but  what  he  is,  in  that  nature,  in 
which  he  enjoys  immense  love  with  the  Fa- 
ther— and  to  proclaim  that  "  God" — in  him- 
self, as  well  as  in  his  external  procedure — 
"  is  Love." 

It  may  be  objected  to  our  remarks  on  the 
epithet  only -begotten,  that,  though  Abraham 
had  other  sons  than  Isaac,  yet  Isaac  is  called 
in  Scripture  his  "  only-begotten  son."  To 
this  we  answer : — that  he  is  termed  ''  only 
son,"  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  "  only- 
begotten  son,"  in  the  New,  because  Abra- 
ham's other  sons  were  the  children  of  bond 
20 


230  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

women^  and  not  the  legal  heirs  to  his  posses- 
sions ; — because  Isaac  was  sup ematur ally  be- 
gotten, and  was  his  "  only  son"  by  his  ivife 
Sarah; — because  he  was  the  "  only  son" 
through  whom  the  visible  Church  was  line- 
ally to  descend  from  Abraham ; — because  he 
was  the  Lord  and  Priest  of  Abraham's  family, 
in  whose  line  the  Messiah  was  to  be  born ; — 
and  because  he  was  the  "  only-begotten  son" 
by  Abraham,  from  whom  the  Jewish  nation, 
the  figurative  sons  of  God,  were  to  proceed. 
In  illustration  of  the  sonship  of  Isaac,  and 
of  the  Israelites,  we  subjoin  Macknight's  re- 
marks on  1  John  ii.  29.  ''  If  ye  know  that 
he  is  righteous,  ye  knoiv  that  every  one  that 

doth  righteousness  is  born  ofhim,^^ "  Eve- 

*'  ry  one  who  worketh  righteousness,  hath  been 
''  begotten.  This  is  the  literal  signification 
"  of  yiyivvYiTAi  from  yivvccw  genero,  gigno,  I 
'^  beget.  Accordingly,  our  translators  have 
''  so  rendered  the  word,  chap.  v.  18. — Besides 
''  born  of  God,  is  an  idea  no  where  else  found 
"  in  Scripture. 

^'  To  understand  the  true  import  of  the 
*'  high  titles,  which,  in  the  New  Testament, 
''  are  given  to  the  disciples  of  Christ,  namely, 
^' the  begotten  of  God,  as  here;  the  sons  of 
*'  God,  and  childrefi  of  God,  as  in  the  next 


OF    CHRIST.  231 

'^  chapter ;  ihe  heirs  of  God,  Romans  viii.  17. 
*'  The  elect  of  God;  the  adopted  of  God; 
•*  saints;  a  royal  priesthood ;  an  holy  nation; 
**  a  peculiar  people,  1  Peter  ii.  9.  the  follow- 
"  ing  observations  may  be  of  use: — 1.  That 
"  these  high  titles  were  anciently  given  to  the 
'•  Israelites  as  a  nation,  because  they  were 
'*  separated  from  the  rest  of  mankind,  to  be 
"  God's  visible  church,  for  the  piirpose  of 
"  preserving  the  knowledge  and  worship  of 
"  him  in  the  world,  as  the  only  true  God. 
''  This  appears  from  God's  own  words  :  Exo- 
"  dusxix.  3.  Tell  the  children  of  Israel;  4.  Yc 
**  have  seen  ivhat  I  did  unto  the  Egyptians, 
"  and  how  I  bare  you  on  eagles^  ivings,  and 
*'  brought  you  unto  myself  5.  Now,  therefore, 
"  if  y^  '^^^^^  obey  7ny  voice  indeed,  and  keep 
*'  my  covenant,  then  ye  shcdl  be  a  peculiar 
"  treasure  unto  me  above  cdl  people,  6.  And 
"  ye  shcdl  be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests, 
**  and  an  holy  nation,  Deut.  xiv.  1.  Ye  are 
"  the  children  of  the  Lord  your  God,  2.  For 
"  thou  art  an  holy  people  to  the  Lord  thy  God, 
"  — 2.  In  particular,  the  title  of  Godh  son. 
"  even  his  first-born,  was  given  to  the  whole 
*'  Israelitish  nation  by  God  himself,  (Exodus 
"  iv.  22.)  chiefly  because  they  were  the  de- 
"  scendants  of  Isaac,  who  was  supernaturally 


232       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

*'  begotten  by  Abraham,  through  the  power 
''  which  accompanied  the  promise,  Genesis 
"  xviii.  10.  Lo  Sarah  shall  have  a  son.  So  St. 
''  Paul  informs  us,  Romans  ix.  7.  Neither  he- 
''  cause  they  are  the  seed  of  Abraham^  are  they 
''  all  children,  namely  of  God  :  But  in  Isaac 
"  shall  a  seed  be  to  thee.  8.  That  is,  the  chiU 
''  dren  ofthejlesh,  these  are  not  the  children  of 
"  God:  But  the  children  of  the  promise  are 
"  accounted  for  seed.  The  Apostle's  meaning 
"  is,  That  Ishmael  and  his  posterity,  whom 
''  Abraham  procreated  by  his  own  natural 
*'  strength,  being  children  of  the  flesh,  were 
''  not  the  children  of  God ;  that  is,  they  were 
''  not  made  the  visible  church  and  people  of 
"  God.  But  Isaac  and  his  descendants,  whom 
''  Abraham  procreated  through  the  strength 
"  which  accompanied  the  promise,  Lo  Sarah 
"  shall  have  a  Son,  being  more  properly  pro- 
"  created  by  God  than  by  Abraham,  were  the 
"  children  of  God ;  that  is,  were  made  the 
''  visible  church  and  people  of  God,  because 
'•  by  their  supernatural  generation,  and  their 
"  title  to  inherit  Canaan,  they  were  a  fit 
"  image  of  the  Catholic  invisible  church  of 
"  God,  consisting  of  believers  of  all  ages  and 
•'  nations,  who  being  regenerated  by  the  Spi- 
^'  rit  of  God,  are  the  true  children  of  God. 


OF    CHRIST.  233 

^*  and  heirs  of  the  heavenly  country,  of  which  ^ 
"  Canaan  was  the  type. — 3.  As  the  promise, 
"  Lo  Sarah  shall  have  a  son,  which  was  given 
"  to  Abraham,  when  he  was  an  hundred 
"  years  old,  and  Sarah  was  ninety,  implied 
"  that  that  Son  was  to  be  supernaturally  pro  ■ 
"  created,  so  the  promise  given  to  Abraham, 
"  Genesis  xvii.  5.  A  Father  of  many  nations 
"  I  have  constituted  thee,  implied  that  the  ma- 
"  ny  nations  of  believers,  who,  by  this  pro- 
"  mise,  were  given  to  Abraham  for  seed,  were 
"to  be  generated  by  the  operation  of  the 
"  Spirit  of  God  producing  in  them  faith  and 
"  obedience,  similar  to  the  faith  and  obedi- 
"  ence  for  which  Abraham  was  constituted 
"  the  father  of  all  believers. — This  higher  ge- 
"  neration,  by  which  believers  have  the  moral 
"  nature  of  God  communicated  to  them,  is 
"  excellently  described,  John  i.  12.  As  many 
"  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to 
"  become  the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  ivho 
"  believe  on  his  name,  13.  '0/  iyiwyj^i^trotv 
"  which  were  begotten  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the 
"  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but 
"  of  God:  that  is,  men  become  the  true  sons 
''  of  God,  not  by  their  being  naturally  de- 
''  scended  from  this  or  that  father,  nor  by 
"  their  being  called  the  sons  of  God  by  men 
20* 


234<  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIF 

"  like  themselves,  but  by  God's  bestowing  on 
"  them  that  high  appellation  on  account  of 
'^  their  faith  and  holiness. — 4.  If  the  Israelites, 
"  of  whom  the  ancient  visible  church  and 
"  people  of  God  was  composed,  were  all 
^'  called  the  sons  of  God,  because  Isaac,  from 
"  whom  they  descended,  was  supernaturally 
*'  begotten  by  the  power  of  God ;  certainly 
"  believers  of  all  ages  and  nations,  of  whom 
**  the  invisible  Catholic  church  and  people  of 
"  God  is  composed,  may,  with  much  greater 
"  propriety,  be  called  the  so7is  of  God,  since 
"  they  are  begotten  of  God,  and  possess  the 
"  moral  nature  of  God.  This  Catholic  in- 
"  visible  church  of  God  is  not  limited  to  any 
"  one  race  of  men,  nor  to  any  one  age  or 
"  country  of  the  w^orld.  It  hath  subsisted 
"  from  the  beginning,  and  is  scattered  over 
''  the  whole  earth.  But  after  the  general 
"  judgment,  the  members  of  this  widely  ex- 
"  tended  church  will  be  gathered  together, 
"  and  carried  by  Christ  in  a  body,  into  the 
"  heavenly  country,  their  promised  inheri- 
"  tance,  of  which  Canaan,  the  inheritance  of 
"  Abraham's  natural  seed  by  Isaac,  was  the 
"  emblem  and  pledge." 

The  speciality  of  our  Lord's  Sonship,  and 
the  propriety  which  he  pos^^esses  in  the  Fa- 


OF    CHRIST.  235 

ther's  nature,  are  particularly  noticed  in  Ro- 
mans viii.  3.  "  For  what  the  law  could  not 
do,  in  that  it  was  weak  through  the  flesh,  God 
sending  his  own  Son,  in  the  likeness  of  sinful 
flesh,  and  for  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh. 
— 32.  He  that  spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  de- 
livered him  up  for  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  ivith 
him  also  freely  give  us  all  things?'''^  As  our 
Lord  terms  God  the  Father  in  John  v.  18, — 
TTitTg^ot  i<^<ov,  his  peculiar  and  proper  Father,  in 
the  manner  in  which  he  could  be  Father  to 
none  else,  so  the  Apostle,  in  this  last  quoted 
verse,  terms  the  Son,  i^io?  'vio^,  his  own  Son, 
— the  peculiar  and  proper  Son  of  the  Father, 
in  that  sense  in  which  none  else  could  be  Son. 
All  others  are  sons  of  God  in  consequence  of 
their  creation,  or  of  a  change  of  their  moral 
principles ;  but  the  Son  could  not  be  so,  in 
consequence  of  either  of  these  events,  for  he 
is  i^iog  'viog,  Son,  in  the  manner  in  which  none 
else  is  Son.  Neither  the  creation  of  his  hu- 
man nature,  nor  any  event  occurring  therein, 
could  constitute  him  Son. 

It  is  evident,  from  the  subsequent  passages, 
that  the  Jews  universally  believed  the  Son 
of  God  to  be  God,  and  that  they  accounted 
it  blasphemy  in  one,  whom  they  esteemed  a 
mortal,  to  assume  this  character.    John  v.  17, 


236       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHrP 

18.  "  Jesus  answered  them,  My  Father  work- 
eth  hitherto,  and  I  ivork.  Therefore  the  Jews 
sought  the  more  to  kill  him,  because  he  not  only 
had  broken  the  Sabbath,  but  said  also,  that 
God  was  his  Father,  making  himself  equal 
with  God.^^  John  x.  S3.  "  The  Jews  answered 
him  saying.  For  a  good  work  we  stone  thee 
not ;  but  for  blasphemy,  and  because  that  thou, 
being  a  man,  makest  thyself  God.  SQ.  Say 
ye  of  him,  whom  the  Father  hath  sanctified, 
and  sent  into  the  ivorld.  Thou  blasphemest ; 
because  I  said,  I  am  the  Son  of  God?^^  Mat- 
thew xxvi.  63 — 66.  "  And  the  High  Priest 
answered  and  said  unto  him,  I  adjure  thee 
by  the  living  God,  that  thou  tell  us,  whether 
thou  be  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  Jesus 
saith  unto  him.  Thou  hast  said;  nevertheless, 
I  say  unto  you,  Hereafter  shall  ye  see  the  Son 
of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  power,  and 
coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven.  Then  the 
High  Priest  rent  his  clothes,  saying,  He  hath 
spoken  blasphemy ;  what  further  need  have  ive 
of  witnesses  ?  behold,  now  ye  have  heard  his 
blasphemy.  What  think  ye  f  They  answered 
and  said.  He  is  guilty  of  death.''^  John  xix. 
7.  "  The  Jews  answered  him.  We  have  a  law, 
and  by  our  law  he  ought  to  die,  because  he 
made  himself  the  Son  of  God.^^ 


OF    CHRIST.  237 

That  the  Son  of  God  was  not  only  God, 
in  the  universal  opinion  of  the  Jews,  but 
was  God  in  fact,  as  well  as  in  opinion,  is  ob- 
vious, from  1  John  v.  4.  The  characteristic 
distinction  of  those  who  overcome  the  world 
is,  that  they  are  spiritually  born  of  God. 
'*  For  tvhatsoever  is  horn  of  God,  overcometh 
the  world:  and  this  is  the  victory  that  over- 
cometh the  world,  even  our  faith, "^"^  They  who 
overcome  the  world  are  those  who  are  born 
of  God,  and  who  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Son 
of  God.  V.  5.  "  Who  is  he  that  overcometh 
the  world,  hut  he  that  helieveth  that  Jesus  is 
the  Son  of  God  r?" 

The  testimony  of  Scripture  is  decisive ; 
its  contents  evince  that  the  Son  of  God  is 
Eternal.  Hear  its  declaration:  1  John  v. 
11 — 13.  "  And  this  is  the  record,  that  God 
hath  given  to  us  eternal  life :  and  this  life  is 
in  his  Son.  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  life ; 
and  he  that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God  hath  not 
life.  These  things  have  I  written  unto  you 
that  believe  on  the  name  of  the  Son  of  God ; 
that  ye  may  know  that  ye  have  eternal  life, 
and  that  ye  may  believe  on  the  name  of  the 
Son  of  God." 


238  THE    ETERNAL    SOxNSHIP 


We  shall  conclude  this  series  of  observa- 
tions by  such  reflections  as  naturally  arise 
from  the  subject. 

The  three  persons  of  the  Godhead  are  re- 
presented as  employed  in  the  ])lan  of  redemp- 
tion. One  of  these  specifically  accomplished 
that  salvation  by  himself.  The  name  person 
is  a  philosophical  term,  which  is  attributable 
to  all  who  are  comprehended  under  it,  and 
which  becomes  specific  only,  when  applied  to 
an  object,  whose  state  is  either  previously  un- 
derstood by  the  intellect,  or  is  made  known 
by  description.  This  state,  amongst  rnen,  is 
only  definitely  known  by  related  notions, 
which  enable  us,  when  a  particular  object  is 
mentioned,  to  apprehend  its  relation  to  other 
objects.  As  men  are  temporary,  all  such  re- 
lations are  necessarily  originated  in  time ;  and 
have  periods  whence  they  are  dated.  The 
persons  with  whom  we  are  thus  acquainted, 
whether  of  our  own  or  any  other  created  race, 
are,  therefore,  restricted  to  those  specific  pe- 
riods, both  in  our  apprehension  of  them  and 
in  themselves,  at  which  their  related  state 
commenced.  The  persons — the  notion  of 
whoso  individuality  is  obtained  by  their  con- 


OF    CHRIST.  239 

nexion  with  others,  either  expressly  known, 
or  understood  to  have  existed, — may  possess 
other  adventitious  adjuncts,  whose  existence 
does  not  increase  or  diminish  the  reality  of 
their  personality.  These  adjuncts  arise  from 
the  exertion  of  their  powers  as  individuals, 
and  are  adventitious ;  for  they  may  disappear 
without  affecting  the  identity  of  the  person. 
Such  adjuncts  depend  on  the  circumstances 
in  which  the  person  is  placed,  and  on  his  ca- 
pability to  evolve  his  energies  in  these  cir- 
cumstances. They  are,  generally,  those  of 
rank,  fame,  and  imputed  talents.  With  the 
cessation  of  the  circumstances  and  energies 
which  gave  birth  to  these  adjuncts,  they  cease 
to  be  applicable  to  the  person,  who  still  re- 
mains the  same. 

Provided  there  were  only  one  individual 
of  the  same  class  in  existence,  excepting 
one's  self,  the  very  circumstance  of  the  one 
individual  being  thus  alone,  and  distinct  from 
all  other  objects,  would  enable  the  other  to 
apprehend  the  identity  of  that  individual, 
seeing  he  could  not  be  confounded  with  any 
other.  But  at  the  moment  in  which  two  ob- 
jects are  presented  to  the  mind,  the  very  fact 
of  the  presentation  induces  a  comparison, 
the  effect  of  which  is  to  distinguish  the  one 


240       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

object  from  the  other;  wliilst,  at  the  same 
time,  we  distinguish  them  both  from  all  other 
objects.  This  law  of  our  constitution  pre- 
serves our  knowledge  of  the  identity  of  all 
beings,  w^ithin  the  reach  of  our  sensible  organs, 
and  enables  us  to  transfer  to  those,  who  are 
not  the  objects  of  our  senses,  the  principles 
of  identity  w  hich  we  have  thus  mentally  ob- 
tained. Through  the  medium  of  testimony, 
we  rely  on  the  comparisons  made  by  others, 
who  have  sensibly  beheld  the  objects  referred 
to,  and  we  receive  the  declaration  of  what 
they  have  witnessed,  as  if  we  ourselves  had 
witnessed  the  same  circumstances.  The  pro- 
cess, in  this  latter  case,  is  threefold.  We 
first,  on  beholding  the  being,  determine  that 
he  must  be  a  separate  existence  and  have 
identity ;  we  then,  at  the  same  time,  deter- 
mine, by  comparison,  the  principles  which 
shall,  in  our  minds,  establish  that  identity, 
so  that  we  may  think  and  act  upon  it ;  and 
lastly,  we  credit  those  who  inform  us  that 
they  have  beheld  and  compared,  as  we  would 
have  done  in  their  case. 

The  principles  by  which  we  originally 
institute  a  comparison  between  objects,  so 
that  we  may  distinguish  the  one  from  the 
other,  are  founded  on  the  law  of  our  race, 


OF    CHRIST.  241 

by  which  the  different  individuals  succeed 
each  other,  by  the  peculiar  propinquity  of 
nature  of  Father  to  Son.  That  which,  in 
this  case,  is  true  of  all  men,  is  true  of  each 
individual.  Though  this  fact  does  not  al- 
ways enter,  indeed,  but  seldom  enters,  into 
our  tlioughts,  when  comparing  and  distin- 
guishing individuals,  yet,  it  is  inconceivable, 
how  there  could  be  any  comparisons  without 
it.  It  is  the  first  essay  of  comparison  which 
displays  itself;  for  the  infant  uniformly  first 
distinguishes  its  parents,  or  those  who  act 
as  the  parents  would  have  done.  It  is  the 
first  association  in  our  minds,  when  contem- 
plating the  object;  for  we  imiformly  first 
institute  a  comparison  between  the  infant 
and  its  parents,  known  or  unknown.  When 
the  parents  are  unknown,  our  notions  imme- 
diately institute  a  filiation  between  the  child 
and  the  parents  who,  ^ve  certainly  know, 
must  have  existed.  The  parents  must  have 
existed  before  any  comparison  could  be  in- 
stituted between  the  children  of  the  same 
family ;  which  latter  comparison  is  a  conse- 
quence of  our  being  enabled  to  institute  the 
former  one. 

When,    from   particular   families,    we    ex- 
tend our  comparisons  to  mankind,  any  know- 
21 


242  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

ledge  of  distinction  which  we  obtain  among 
them,  must  necessarily  be  preceded  by  the 
same  facts.  Mankind  participate  of  the  same 
general  nature,  and  of  the  mode  by  which 
that  nature  is  obtained.  When  we  compare 
the  present  with  the  past  generation,  or  any 
generation  of  the  past  with  another,  it  is 
only  a  comparison  of  groups  of  individuals 
related  to  groups  that  preceded,  as  parents 
and  children.  Yet  the  fact  of  such  relation 
does  not  introduce  any  comparison  into  our 
means  of  ascertaining  the  separate  existence 
and  identity  of  individuals ;  it  is  the  mode  by 
which  we  are  enabled  to  effect  such  know- 
ledge, though  it  does  not  constitute  to  the  in- 
dividual his  own  separate  existence  and  iden- 
tity. Existence,  in  a  related  state,  among 
persons,  is,  therefore,  the  only  existence  which, 
in  our  present  state,  can  enable  us  to  obtain 
the  information  of  the  distinction  of  one  indi- 
vidual from  another;  yet  this  information 
does  not  7nake  the  respective  individuals  per- 
sons, but  is  essentially  necessary  to,  and  in- 
separable from,  our  apprehension  of  them,  as 
persons. 

The  persons,  whose  knowledge  of  sepa- 
rate existence  we  have  thus  obtained,  depend 
on  circumstances  for  the  length  of  their  con- 


OF    CHRIST.  243 

linuance,  as  objects  of  our  apprehension. — 
When  they  disappear  from  our  senses,  by  the 
process  of  death  in  the  disorganization  of 
their  parts,  the  possibility  of  such  compari- 
sons concerning  the  actual  state  of  the  indi- 
viduals ceases,  but  the  truth  remains  unal- 
terable, that  such  comparisons  were  made 
and  were  true.  Hence  arises  our  historical 
knowledge,  a  chain  of  testimonies,  the  last 
link  of  which  descends  to  us,  assuring  us,  on 
creditable  grounds,  that  comparisons  were  in- 
stituted, when  the  objects  were  cognizable  by 
the  senses  of  those  who  beheld  them. 

Existence,  in  a  related  state,  is,  therefore, 
the  foundation  of  all  knowledge  of  the  past 
and  of  the  present,  unless  that  which  is  in- 
tuitive. That  which  is  intuitive  is  the  simple 
feeling  of  existence,  enabling  us  to  perceive 
that  we  exist,  and  that  others  exist.  But 
this  intuitive  knowledge  never  could  confer 
on  us  the  mode,  by  which  we  discriminate 
the  existence  of  one  being  from  another, — 
unless  it  were  accompanied  with  the  process 
of  comparison,  which  arises  from  related 
states.  Our  intuition  is  the  very  first  move- 
ment of  thought,  in  this  investigation,  or 
rather,  it  is  the  inception  of  investigation 
resident  within  us,     Related  states  are  pre- 


244       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

rented  to  that  mind  which  is  endowed  witli 
this  inception  of  investigation,  and  which 
evolves  the  train  of  thought  by  the  appre- 
hension of  these  related  states.  This  appre- 
jiension  is  consecutive  with  our  principles  of 
comparison,  and  is  more  or  less  just,  accord- 
ing to  the  scope  and  range  of  objects  before 
the  mind.  Such  is  the  mode  by  which  our 
knowledge  is  obtained. 

In  the  revelation  which  God  has  given  to 
us,  he  announces  that  there  are  persons,  in 
his  simple  and  undivided  nature,  and  that 
one  of  these  persons  specially  effected  the 
.plan  of  salvation. .  Being  participant  of  a  na- 
ture which  is  undivided,  these  persons  can- 
not be  separate  and  distinct  Gods,  as  men 
are  separate  and  distinct  individuals,  who 
possess  a  nature  that  is  divisible.  The  states, 
in  which  they  are  persons,  yet  one  God,  are 
described  :  1  st.  As  a  generation  of  that  per- 
son who  effected  our  salvation,  from  another 
person  who  addresses  the  person  begotten 
thus,  "  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  be- 
gotten thee,^^  2d.  As  a  procession  of  the  per- 
son w  ho  applies  salvation,  from  the  other  two 
persons. — Of  the  person  who  applies  salva- 
tion, the  person  who  effected  salvation  says, 
^'  Biit  when  the  Comforter  is  come,  whom  IiviU 


OF    CHRIST.  245 

send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit 
of  truth,  which  proceedeth  from  the  Father, 
he  shall  testify  of  meJ^''  With  reference  to  the 
other  two,  the  person  promised  by  our  Lord 
is  termed  "  the  Spirit  of  the  Father"^^  and  "  the 
Spirit  of  the  Son.'^^  In  accordance  with  *'  the 
begetting"  and  ^'  being  begotten"  of  the  two 
persons  first  mentioned,  they  are  termed  the 
Father  and  the  Son  ;  and,  in  accordance 
with  the  "  procession"  of  the  last  person 
mentioned,  from  these  two,  who  are  Father 
and  Son,  he  is  termed  the  Holy  Spirit. — 
These  names  are,  therefore,  significant  of 
their  respective  states  of  existence  in  the 
undivided  nature,  and  are  given  on  account 
of  that  state  of  existence  which  is  termed 
"  being  begotten"  and  "  proceeding  from." 
The  names  do  not  precede  their  state,  but 
are  the  peculiar  and  appropriate  expressions 
describing  that  which  is  announced  as  pre- 
viously existing ;  the  states  are  true,  not  on 
account  of  the  designations  given,  but  of  the 
facts  expressly  recorded.  The  person  Avho 
effected  our  salvation,  and  who  is  Son,  thus 
arranged  the  order  of  these  persons, — "  The 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost."  That 
which  is  inherent  in  the  Divine  nature,  must 
inhere  for  ever,  because  it  is  immutable.  The 
21* 


246  THE    ETERNAL    SOCNSHIP 

knowledge  which  is  thus  communicated  to 
us  does   not  constitute   these    persons  to  be 
persons,  any  more  than  the  knowledge  which 
we  obtain  of  men,  constitutes  them  to  be  the 
individuals  which  they  are.     These  persons 
of   the    Godhead   must,    respectively,   be   in 
some  definite  states  of  existence,  peculiar  to 
each  of  them ;    otherwise,  they  are  not  per- 
sons, but  one  person,  —  which  is  absurd. — 
That  which  has  no  state  of  existence  pecu- 
liar to  itself,  in  relation  to  others  of  its  own 
nature,  may  be  in  being,  as  inanimate  mat- 
ter, but  cannot  possess  the  properties  of  pe- 
culiar exertion  or  activity,  which  are  neces- 
sary to  the  being  of  a  person.    This  is  a  grade 
of  existence  infinitely  beyond  that  of  simple 
being, — for  being  can   be   predicated  of  all 
objects  rational  and  irrational,  animate  and 
inanimate.    The  states  of  existence,  in  which 
the  persons  of  the  Divine  nature  are, — are 
those  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit.     If 
there  be  no  specific  enunciation  of  the  state 
of  existence  of  that  Divine  person  who  ef- 
fected our  salvation, — we  do  not  know  what 
person  effected  our  salvation,  but  only  that 
a  Divine  person  did  so.    Neither  do  we  know 
what  Divine  person  he  is,  who  is  represented 
as  more  peculiarly  devising  salvation; — ^nor 


OF   CHRIST.  '   247 

do  we  know  what  Divine  person  he  is,  who 
applies  salvation.  All  that  we  know  is,  that 
there  are  persons,  but,  with  respect  to  each, 
nothing  is  predicated  or  actually  revealed. 
For  if  there  be  no  state  revealed,  then,  the 
terms  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  are  mere 
adjuncts  or  titles,  referable  to  any  state  of 
Divine  existence ;  the  terms  Saviour,  Mes- 
siah, King,  Priest,  Prophet,  Comforter,  Sanc- 
tifier,  &c.  have  no  especial  person  to  whom 
they  belong,  but  are  referable  indefinitely  to 
persons,  whose  states  we  cannot  tell,  because 
they  are  presented  to  our  minds  only  by  titles, 
and  not  by  expressions  determining  their  pe- 
culiar modes  of  existence.  But  such  a  reve- 
lation is  surely  preposterous ;  for  it  fails  in  the 
essential  point  of  a  revelation,  viz.  the  de- 
scription of  those  persons  from  whom  it  comes, 
and  whom  it  apparently  declares, — ^yet  virtu- 
ally does  not  declare. 

If  the  peculiar  designations  of  generation 
and  procession,  which  the  Divine  persons  ap- 
propriate to  each  other,  be  only  titular  ad- 
juncts,— we  cannot  tell  how  many  persons  are 
in  the  Divine  nature ;  nor  can  we  tell  whether 
any  person  be  therein, — seeing  the  same  per- 
sons may  bear  the  titles  of  Father,  Son,  Holy 
Ghost,  Messiah,  Comforter,  High  Priest,  Ste. 


248  THE    ETERiNAL    SONSHIP 

— if  these  be  terms  indicative,  merely,  of  ac> 
tions,  which  obtain  such  titles,  in  the  Divine 
procedure  affecting  our  race.  Unless  the  sta- 
tus, the  locus  standi,  the  state  of  being  which 
the  others  have  not,  and  which  is  essential  to 
the  predicated  person  be  revealed, — we  have  , 
no  stability  of  conception, — we  have  no  con- 
ception of  one  person  as  distinct  from  another ; 
— the  mind  has  no  rest  on  this  subject, — it 
has  no  object  on  which  to  concentrate  its 
thoughts  ; — neither  individuality  nor  compari- 
son of  related  existence  are  presented  to  it. 

The  foundation  of  our  knowledge  of  per- 
son  is  not,  in  this  case,  obtained  :  man  cannot 
elicit  his  powers  on  those  objects  which  are 
inaccessible  to  his  intellect,  in  any  mode  in 
which  he  can  attempt  to  examine  them.  The 
revelation,  then,  which  supposes  the  absence 
of  the  state  of  existence  of  Divine  persons,  we 
humbly  submit,  must  be  a  nugatory  revela- 
tion, and  irrespective  of  what  ought  to  be  its 
principal  object.  All  other  designations,  in 
that  revelation,  are,  confessedly,  titular,  and, 
— unless  the  designations  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost,  contain  the  state  of  existence  of 
the  Divine  persons,— their  state  is  not  revealed. 

If  it  be  said  that  the  Divine  person  was  in 
the  state  of  Son  of  God,  that  he  might,  on 


OF    CHRIST.  249 

earth,  accomplish  the  salvation  of  his  people, 
— then,  on  the  accomplishment  of  that  work, 
he  may  cease  to  be  Son,  and  in  fact,  accord- 
ing to  such  a  supposition,  he  will  cease  to  be 
Son,  seeing  this  state  was  assumed  for  an  es- 
pecial purpose.  But  we  have,  in  that  case, 
no  guarantee  that  the  advantages  obtained  for 
us  will  not  likewise  cease, — seeing  no  advan- 
tages can  be  permanent,  unless  the  state  in 
which  they  were  procured  be  also  permanent. 
But  permanency  in  the  Godhead  can  have  no 
beginning ;  the  state  in  which  the  Son,  as 
God,  obtained  advantages  for  men,  must  be 
his  state,  independently  of  all  advantages  pro- 
cured for  created  objects. 

The  inherent  states  of  the  persons  of  the 
Godhead  are  not  caused  by  our  knowledge  oL 
them ; — the  revelation  of  these  states  is  neces- 
sary to  give  us  knowledge  of  the  persons  of 
the  Godhead. 


250       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 


CHAPTER  X. 


Observations  on  the  expression  Son  of  Man. 

We  have  shown  the  nature  of  our  Lord's 
Sonship  in  the  Godhead, — that  he  is  Son,  es- 
sentially in  the  Divine  nature, — that  he  is 
Son  in  self-existence, — that  he  never  could 
have  begun  to  be  Son,  and  will  never  cease 
to  be  Son, — that  he  is  peculiarly  and  properly 
the  Eternal  Son  of  God.  We  have  endea- 
voured to  refute  the  opinions  of  those  who 
imagine  that  he  is  styled  Son  of  God,  in  con- 
sequence of  his  Messiahship  or  any  other 
event,  and  who  maintain  that  his  designation, 
Son  of  God,  is  only  a  title.  We  have  endea- 
voured to  prove,  from  the  tenor  of  Scripture, 
that  this  designation  determines  his  state  of 
existence  in  the  Godhead. 

In  the  course  of  our  remarks  we  have,  in 
some  measure,  anticipated  observations  on 
the  human  nature  of  our  Lord,  ^vhich  is  now 
more   peculiarly  our   subject   of  illustration. 


OF    CHRIST.  251 

it  is  almost  unnecessary  to  say  that  the  expres- 
sion Son  of  Mem,  is  used  in  Scripture,  some- 
times to  denominate  the  whole  human  race, 
and  sometimes  an  individual  of  that  race. 
The  term  is  particularly  vigorous,  seeing  it 
not  only  exhibits  the  existence  of  men,  but 
particularly  illustrates  the  mode  by  which 
men  come  into  being,  and  are  continued  in 
being.  It  expresses  the  existence  of  mankind, 
and  their  existence  in  a  related  state.  It  dis- 
tinguishes from  all  other  appearances,  which 
are  recorded  as  having  occurred  in  this  world 
— whether  those  of  God  himself  or  of  an- 
gels. 

Our  readers  will  remember  our  observa- 
tions on  the  nature  of  existence,  especially  in 
Chapter  VIII.  We  have  there  shown  that, 
among  men,  the  peculiar  constitution  of  their 
being  causes  them  to  exist  in  related  states ; 
and  that  all  beings,  more  especially  persons, 
are,  by  the  very  conformation  of  their  being, 
framed  to  exist  as  separate  and  distinct  beings, 
independent  of  all  other  beings.  The  only 
exception,  with  which  we  are  acquainted,  in 
the  universe  of  God,  to  this  law  of  the  consti- 
tution of  existence  is  that  of  our  Lord's  hu- 
man nature,  denominated  Son  of  Man.  This 
human  nature,  we  remarked,  was  expressly 


252  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

formed  that  it  might  subsist  in  another  being. 
It  cannot  have  separate  existence  of  its  own  ; 
it  cannot  be  in  itself  a  being  independent  of 
every  other.  It  only  is,  that  it  may  be  in 
another.  It  is  not  a  person  of  itself,  but  ob- 
tains personality  w^ith  that  nature  to  w^hich  it 
is  united — in  which  the  person  who  assumed 
it  essentially  is. 

The  human  nature  of  our  Lord — that 
which  is  denominated  Son  of  Man — was  pe- 
culiarly formed,  and  produced  in  a  manner 
different  from  all  other  men,  in  order  that 
it  might  exist  in  a  manner  different  from 
their  existence,  and  that  it  might  possess  a 
constitution,  whose  principles  would  cause  it 
to  be  a  being  subsisting  in  another  being. 
Of  the  original  formation  of  this  nature  it  is 
said,  Matthew  i.  20.  "  But  while  he  thought 
on  these  things,  behold,  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
appeared  unto  him  in  a  dream,  saying,  Jo- 
seph, thou  son  of  David,  fear  not  to  take  unto 
thee  Mary,  thy  wife ;  for  that  which  is  con- 
(^eived  in  her  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  she 
shall  bring  forth  a  son,  and  thou  shalt  call 
his  name  JESUS  :  for  he  shall  save  his  peo- 
ple from  their  sins."  In  Luke  i.  31.  the 
angel  says  to  Mary,  "  Behold,  thou  shalt  con- 
ceive in  thy  womb,  and  bring  forth  a  Son, 


OF    CHRIST.  253 

and  shalt  call  his  name  JESUS."  35.  "  And 
the  angel  answered  and  said  unto  her,  The 
Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  the 
power  of  the  Highest  shall  overshadow 
thee,"  &c 

Our  Lord's  human  nature — the  Son  of 
Man — being  thus  formed,  was  born.  Mattb, 
i.  24,  25.  "  Then  Joseph,  being  raised  from 
sleep,  did  as  the  angel  of  the  Lord  had 
bidden  him,  and  took  unto  him  his  wife : 
And  knew  her  not  till  she  had  broudit  forth 
her  first-born  son :  and  he  called  his  name 
JESUS."  Luke  ii.  6,  7.  "  And  so  it  was, 
that,  while  they  were  there,  the  days  were 
accomplished  that  she  should  be  delivered. 
And  she  brought  forth  her  first-born  son,  and 
wrapped  him  in  swaddling  clothes,  and  laid 
him  in  a  manger  ;  ]:>ecause  there  was  no  room 
for  them  in  the  inn."  Galatians  iv.  4.  "  But 
when  the  fulness  of  the  time  was  come,  God 
sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made 
under  the  law — ." 

Our  Lord,  as  Son  of  Man,  underwent  all 
the  vicissitudes  which  are  incident  to  huma- 
nity, excepting  those  which  partake  of  sin. 
He  was  exposed  to  those  privations  which 
are  peculiar  to  human  nature,  in  our  present 
state  of  existence.  Matthew  viii.  20.  *'  And 
22 


254  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIF 

Jesus  saith  unto  him,  The  foxes  have  holes, 
and  the  birds  of  the  air  have  nests ;  but  the 
Son  of  Man  hath  not  where  to  lay  his  head." 

In  his  humanity,  our  Lord  experienced 
sufferings  and  sorrows.  Luke  ix.  21,  22. 
"  And  he  straitly  charged  them,  and  com- 
manded them  to  tell  no  man  that  thing,  say- 
ing, The  Son  of  Man  must  suffer  many  things, 
and  be  rejected  of  the  elders,  and  Chief 
Priests,  and  Scribes,  and  be  slain,  and  be 
raised  the  third  day." 

The  Son  of  Man  was  betrayed.  Matthew 
xvii.  22,  23.  "  And  while  they  abode  in  Ga- 
lilee, Jesus  said  unto  them.  The  Son  of  Man 
shall  be  betrayed  into  the  hands  of  men : 
And  they  shall  kill  him,  and  the  third  day 
he  shall  be  raised  again."  Luke  xxii.  48. 
"  But  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Judas,  betrayest 
thou  the  Son  of  Man  with  a  kiss  ?" 

The  Son  of  Man  lay  in  the  grave,  and 
arose  from  the  state  of  the  dead.  Matthew 
xii.  40.  "  For  as  Jonas  was  three  days  and 
three  nights  in  the  whale's  belly ;  so  shall 
the  Son  of  Man  be  three  days  and  three 
nights  in  the  heart  of  the  earth." 

The  Son  of  Man  ascended  from  earth  to 
heaven.  John  vi.  61,62.  "  When  Jesus  knew* 
in  himself  that  his  disciples  murmured  at  it, 


OF    CHRIST.  255 

he  said  unto  them,  Doth  this  offend  you? 
What  and  if  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  Man  as- 
cend up  where  he  was  before  ?" 

The  Son  of  Man  is  now  in  heaven,  in  the 
most  glorious  exaltation.  Acts  vii.  55,  56, 
*'  But  he  being  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  looked 
up  steadfastly  into  heaven,  and  saw  the  glory 
of  God,  and  Jesus  standing  on  the  right  hand 
of  God.  And  said,  Behold,  I  see  the  heavens 
opened,  and  the  Son  of  Man  standing  on  the 
right  hand  of  God." 

The  Son  of  Man  shall  again  descend  in 
glory,  and  judge  the  w^orld.  Matthew^  xxiv. 
30.  "  And  then  shall  appear  the  sign  of  the 
Son  of  Man  in  heaven  :  and  then  shall  all  the 
tribes  of  the  earth  mourn,  and  they  shall  see 
the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  hea- 
ven, with  power  and  great  glory."  xxv.  31, 
32.  "  When  the  Son  of  Man  shall  come  in 
his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him, 
then  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glo- 
ry :  And  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  na- 
tions : " 

The  Son  of  Man  is  the  object  of  belief  and 
reliance.  Mark  viii.  38.  ''  Whosoever  there- 
fore shall  be  ashamed  of  me  and  of  my  words 
in  this  adulterous  and  sinful  generation,  of 
him  also  shall  the  Son  of  Man  be  ashamed. 


256  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

when  he  cometh  in  the  glory  of  his  Father, 
with  the  holy  angels."  John  vi.  53,  54  "Then 
Jesus  said  unto  him,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of 
Man,  and  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in 
you.  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh 
my  blood,  hath  eternal  life,  and  I  will  raise 
him  up  at  the  last  day." 

Through  the  Son  of  Man,  sins  are  for- 
given. Matthew  ix.  2.  "  And,  behold,  they 
brought  to  him  a  man  sick  of  the  palsy,  lying 
on  a  bed:  and  Jesus  seeing  their  faith,  said 
unto  the  sick  of  the  palsy,  Son,  be  of  good 
cheer;  thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee."  v.  6. 
*'  But  that  ye  may  know  that  the  Son  of  Man 
hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins,  (then 
saith  he  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy,)  Arise,  take 
up  thy  bed,  and  go  unto  thine  house." 

Through  the  Son  of  Man  holy  principles 
are  infused  into  the  soul.  Matthew  xiii.  37, 
38.  "  He  answered  and  said  unto  them.  He 
that  soweth  the  good  seed  is  the  Son  of  Man : 
The  field  is  the  word :  the  good  seed  are  the 
children  of  the  kingdom  :  but  the  tares  are 
the  children  of  the  wicked  one :-— 43.  Then 
shall  the  righteous  shine  forth  as  the  sun,  in 
the  kingdom  of  the  Father." 


OF    CHRIST.  257 

We  have  shoA\  n,  from  the  foregoing  pas- 
sages, that  the  expression  Son  of  Man ^  obvi- 
ously denotes  the  nature  which  the  Son  of 
God  assumed.  Indeed,  its  usage  appears  nu- 
gatory, unless  it  be  expressly  opposed  to  the 
phrase  *Soyi  of  God; — these  terms  being  in- 
dicative of  the  different  aspects  of  his  natures. 
But  the  expression  Son  of  Man  affords  a  clue 
which  tends  to  miravel  the  entanglements  of 
this  controversy.  Seeing  the  two  epithets 
are  bestowed  on  our  Lord,  they  are  admitted, 
by  every  one,  to  be  indicative  of  something. 
All  who  examine  the  subject,  either  in  a  cur- 
sory or  strict  manner,  allow  that  the  phrase 
Son  of  Man,  denotes  participation  of  the  na- 
ture of  man, — possession  of  those  qualities 
which  are  peculiar  to  man, — and  actions  ap- 
propriate to  the  character  of  man.  The  reali- 
ty of  the  human  nature  cannot  be  doubted  and 
never  was  doubted,  unless  by  those  disturbers 
of  the  Church,  in  its  primitive  ages,  who  de- 
nied the  actual  appearance  of  Jesus,  and  the 
validity  of  his  sufferings, — who  contended 
that  a  sort  of  pantomime  was  played  off  on 
the  senses  of  men,  without  any  character 
having  sustained  a  real .  part.  Actions,  feel- 
ings, emotions,  sayings  of  a  particular  kind, 
are  attributed  to  his  human   nature,  so  that, 


258       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

independently  of  any  express  declaration  of 
his  being  the  Son  of  Man,  the  vestige  of  doubt 
cannot  remain  in  the  mind  of  any  one  of  com- 
petent understanding,  that  these  circumstances 
must  belong  to  human  nature.  The  expres- 
sion must  not  only  mark  the  reality  of  human 
nature,  but  also  the  related  state  of  human 
nature,  which,  as  we  have  already  remarked, 
the  phrase  Son  of  Man  must  convey.  The 
reality  of  his  human  nature  could  not  be 
doubted,  in  consequence  of  its  qualities ;  the 
reality  of  his  relation  to  mankind  could  not 
be  doubted,  seeing  he  was  formed  of  the  sub- 
stance of  the  Virgin  Mary — "  that  which  is 
conceived  in  her  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;" — 
seeing  he  was  "  bone  of  our  bone,  and  flesh 
of  our  flesh ;"  "  for  we  are  members  of  his 
body,  of  his  flesh  and  of  his  bones."  Now, 
whilst  we  readily  grant  that  the  term  Son  of 
God,  of  itself,  unconnected  with  other  cir- 
cumstances, and  applied  to  mankind,  may, 
and  does,  signify  only  a  figurative  Sonship 
arising  from  congeniality  of  principles  in  our 
nature,  with  the  perfections  of  God, — we  ask, 
can  a  figurative  meaning  be  given  to  it,  when 
it  is  put  in  direct  opposition,  and  in  the  most 
elegant,  lively  antithesis,  to  the  phrase  Son 
of  Man  ?    Can  a  mere  figurative  designation 


OF    CHRIST.  259 

— a  title — be  put  in  antithesis  to  that  whicli, 
bona  Jicle,  represents  what  the  words  import  ? 
Can  a  mere  sound  be  placed  in  opposition  to 
that  wiiich  signifies  a  positive  substance  ? — 
Impossible. — No  usage  of  language, — no  con- 
formation of  thought  can  permit  such  abuse, 
or  rather  negation  of  words.  We  do,  indeed, 
occasionally,  in  common  language,  put  a  title 
in  opposition  to  a  person,  who  is  named. 
But,  in  such  a  case,  it  is  uniformly  the  person 
who  bears  the  title,  that  is  opposed.  The 
prince  may  be  put  in  opposition  to  the  poor 
man.  But  is  it  the  mere  letters,  the  literal 
characters,  the  empty  title,  which  we  oppose 
to  the  poor  man  ?  Surely  not : — it  is  the 
person  who  bears  the  title, — who  is  in  the 
state  which  the  title  designates.  The  com- 
mon sense  of  mankind,  and  the  universal 
usage  of  language  denote,  thereby,  a  person 
who  actually  exists  in  the  state  of  priyicedom, 
as  opposed  to  a  person  who  actually  is  in  the 
state  of  poverty.  Terms,  indicative  of  per- 
sons in  a  state  opposed  to  each  other,  uni- 
formly contain  the  states  which  are  thus  con- 
tradistinguished. According  to  this  rule,  the 
terms  Son  of  Man,  and  Son  of  God,  are  op- 
posed. Matthew  xvi.  13 — 17.  "  When  Jesus 
came  into  the  coasts  of  Ccesarea  Philippi,  he 


260  THE    ETERNAL    30JSSH1P 

asked,  his  disciples,  saying,  Whom  do  men  say 
that  /,  the  Son  of  Man,  am?     And  they  said, 
Some  say  that  thou  art  John  the  Baptist; 
some,  Elias ;  and  others,  Jeremias,  or  one  of 
the  prophets.     He  saith  unto  them.  But  whom 
say  ye  that  I  am?    And  Simon  Peter  answer- 
ed and  said.   Thou  art  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God.     And  Jesus  ansivered  and  said 
unto  him-,  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jona : 
for  flesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto 
thee,    but  my  Father  ivhich  is  in  heavenP 
Unless  the  humanity,  and  the  related  state  in 
which  it  exists,  be  here  opposed  to  the  Di- 
vinity, and  its  related  state,  antitheses  must 
be  stript  of  their  meaning,  and  common  sense 
abandoned  in  language.     All  determinate  no- 
tions must  be  absorbed  in  a  chaos  of  words, 
if  a  being  in  a  certain  state  of  existence,  and 
an  abstract  title  be  thus  placed  in  opposition  to 
each  other.     But  what  convinces  us,  beyond 
the  shadow  of  a  doubt,  that  Christ's  humanity 
is  real — that  he  is  the  Son  of  Man — and  that 
he  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  ?   It  is  his 
actions — his  general  and  particular  procedure. 
— And  what  convinces  us  that,  in  the  nature 
of  God,  he  is  the  Son  of  God  ?     It  is  his  ac- 
tions— his  general  and  particular  procedure. 
We  are  convinced,  because  the  Son  of  God 


OF    CHRIST.  261 

created  all  things  in  heaven  and  in  earth, — 
because  all  things  are  created  for  him, — be- 
cause the  Son  is  before  all  things, — and  be- 
cause all  things  consist  in  the  Son.  If  the 
actions  of  the  vSon  of  Man  be  sufficient  to 
indicate,  without  any  hesitation  on  our  part, 
that  he  is  formed  of  the  substance  of  human 
nature,  and,  in  that  human  nature,  is  a  Son, 
— surely  the  actions  peculiar  to  Godhead  are 
sufficient  to  indicate  that  the  Son  of  God  is 
God,  and,  in  the  Divine  nature,  is  Son. 

There  is  one  expression  concerning  the 
Son  of  Man,  which  requires  our  particular 
consideration  ;  seeing  that  at  first  sight,  and 
in  its  literal  acceptation,  it  would  seem  to 
controvert  the  tenor  of  every  other  passage, 
in  which  the  Son  of  Man  is  named.  John 
iii.  13.  "  A7id  no  man  hath  ascended  up  to 
heaven,  but  he  that  came  down  from  heaven, 
even  the  Son  of  Man,  ivhich  is  in  heaven^ 
The  difficulty,  however,  is  only  apparent ;  for 
none  acquainted  with  the  properties  of  matter 
can  suppose  that  our  Lord  meant  to  affirm, 
that  his  body  in  which  he  spake,  and  which 
was  on  earth,  was,  at  the  same  moment,  in 
heaven.  To  ascend  up  to  heaven  is  the  phra- 
seology of  Scripture  for  searching  into,  and 
having  knowledge  of,  divine  truths.     In  this 


262  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

sense  it  is  used,  Deut.  xxx.  11,  12.  where  it 
is  said  of  the  commandment  of  God,  "  Who 
shall  go  up  for  us  to  heaven,  and  bring  it 
unto  us  ?"  i.  e.  Who  shall  enter  into  God's 
secret  counsel,  and  learn  it  by  immediate 
knowledge  ?  Rom.  x.  6.  "But  the  righteous- 
ness which  is  of  faith  speaketh  on  this  w^ise, 
Saj  not  in  thine  heart,  Who  shall  ascend  into 
heaven  ?  (that  is,  to  bring  Christ  down  from 
above,")  The  expression,  no  man  hath  as- 
cended up  to  heaven,  evidently  means,  from 
the  tenor  of  the  passage,  7io  man  hath  ex- 
plored and  revealed  the  truths  of  heaven,  but 
he  that  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the  Son 
of  Man,  ivhich  is  in  heaven.  But  how,  it 
will  be  asked,  could  the  Son  of  Man  come 
down  from  heaven,  and,  at  the  same  time,  be 
in  heaven  ?  The  term  Son  of  Man,  is  some- 
times used  to  denote  the  Messiah,  on  account 
of  the  appearance  which  he  would  present, 
when  he  came  among  men.  That  which 
mankind  beheld  is,  by  the  figure  synecdoche, 
placed  for  the  ivhole  perso7i.  From  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  human  nature,  which  alone 
was  cognizable  by  the  senses,  the  appellation 
Son  of  Man  is  given  to  the  Messiah,  in  an- 
cient prophecy.  Psalm  Ixxx.  17.  "  Let  thy 
hand  be  upon  the  man  of  thy  right  hand. 


OF    CHRIST.  263 

upon  the  Son  of  Man,  whom  thou  madest 
strong  for  thyself."     Daniel  vii.  13,  14.  "  I 
saw  in  the  night  visions,  and  behold  one  like 
the  Son  of  Man  came  with  the  clouds  of  hea- 
ven, and  came  to  the  Ancient  of  Days,  and 
they  brought   him   near   before   him.      And 
there  was  given  him  dominion,    and  glory, 
and  a  kingdom,  that  all  people,  nations,  and 
languages,  should  serve  him  ;  his  dominion  is 
an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  pass 
away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not 
be  destroyed."     The  Son  of  Man,  therefore, 
in  this  passage,  means  the  complex  person 
of  the  Messiali— his  Divine  and  human  na- 
tures.    According  to  this  explication,  Christ 
says.  No  man  hath  revealed  the  Divine  truths, 
unless  the  Messiahy  who,  from  his  external  ap- 
pearance, is  styled  the  Son  of  Man — who,  in 
his  Divinity,  which  is  in  heaven,  assumed  hu- 
manity  on  earth — and  ivho,  even  now,  is  in 
heaven,  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,     We  sub- 
join  the   note  of  the  valuable   commentator 
Guyse,  on  ihis  verse :    "  As  the  Divine  and 
"  human  natures  were  united  in  the  person  of 
"  Christ,  attributions  are  made  of  the  proper- 
"  ties  of  one  nature  to  him,  whilst  he  is  spoken 
"  of  under  a  title  which  relates  to  his  other 
"  nature.     Thus,  when  it  is  said,  (1  Cor.  ii. 


264  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

"  8.)  The  Lord  of  glory  ivas  crucified,  and 
"  (Acts  XX.  28.)  he  is  called  God,  who  pur- 
"  chased  the  Church  ivith  his  own  blood.  The 
"  meanhig  is  not  that  he,  as  the  Lord  of 
'*  glory,  was  crucified,  or,  as  God,  shed  his 
"  blood,  as  if  the  Divine  nature  could  be  cru- 
"  cified  and  bleed ;  but  that  the  person,  who 
''  was  the  Lord  of  glory  in  one  nature,  was 
•'  crucified  in  the  other ;  and  the  person  who 
''  was  God  in  one  nature,  redeemed  the 
•'  Church  with  his  own  blood,  .which  be- 
"  longed  to  his  other  nature.  So  when  it  is 
"said,  The  Son  of  Man  is  in  heaven,  the 
"  meaning  is  not  that  he,  as  the  Son  of  Man, 
''  was  there  whilst  he  was  on  earth ;  but  that 
"  he  who  was  here  in  his  human  nature,  was 
"  there  in  his  Divine." 

It  is  said  in  John  v.  26,  27.  "  For  as  the 
Father  hath  life  in  himself;  so  hath  he  given 
to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself:  and  hath 
given  him  authority  to  execute  judgment  also, 
because  he  is  the  Son  of  Man,^^  The  mean- 
ing of  this  passage  (v.  27th,)  evidently  is,  that 
the  judgment  is  lodged  in  the  Son,  because  he 
is  the  Son  of  Man.  When  duly  weighed,  per- 
haps no  passage  in  Scripture  more  decisively 
illustrates  the  nature  of  our  Lord's  inherent 
state  of  Sonship,  and  his  assumed  nature  of 


OF    CHRiSi.  265 

Son  of  Man.  Our  Lord,  in  the  preceding 
verses,  declares  himself  to  be  the  Son  of  God, 
the  Father ;  he  describes  his  equality  with 
him,  in  omnipotence,  omniscience,  and  other 
Divine  attributes,  and  in  his  complete  partici- 
pation of  counsel  and  design ;  he  then  men- 
tions a  peculiar  office  which  belongs  to  him, 
in  a  most  appropriate  manner, — adding,  as 
the  reason,  that  he  is  the  Son  of  Man.  This 
is  the  office  of  judgment — the  final  rewarding 
and  punishing  "  all  his  and-  our  enemies." 
The  particular  propriety  of  this  judgment  be- 
ing conferred  on  the  Son  seems  to  consist  in 
this, — that  a  created  being  will  be  the  medium, 
through  which,  determination  on  all  actions 
shall  be  made,  and  rewards  and  punishments 
distribut€d  to  created  beings  assembled  before 
the  judgment-seat.  —  By  his  voice — by  the 
proclamation  of  the  Son  of  Man, — all  men 
shall  be  called  from  their  tombs  to  meet  him 
in  judgment.  V.  28,  29.  "  Marvel  not  at  this  : 
for  the  hour  is  coming,  in  the  which  all  that 
are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall 
come  forth ;  they  that  have  done  good,  unto 
the  resurrection  of  life ;  and  they  that  have 
done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation." 
This  is  the  grand  transaction  which  the  Son 
shall  achieve,  in  the  nature  which  is  So?i  of 
23 


266       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

Man,  This  is  the  last  victory ;  when  all  his 
enemies  shall  be  scattered  before  him.  An- 
cient prophecy  glows  with  the  des^cription  of 
this  epoch,  when  the  greatness  of  the  human 
nature  shall  be  pre-eminent  amongst  those 
who  "  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  firma- 
ment," "  as  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever."  Of 
the  authority  which  is  given  to  the  Son  to 
execute  judgment,  because  he  is  the  Son  of 
Man,  Jeremiah  thus  writes,  xxiii.  5,  6.  "  Be- 
hold, the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord,  that  I 
will  raise  unto  David  a  righteous  Branch,  and 
a  King  shall  reign  and  prosper,  and  shall  exe- 
cute judgment  and  justice  in  the  earth.  In 
his  days  Judah  shall  be  saved,  and  Israel  shall 
dwell  safely:  and  this  is  his  name  where- 
by he  shall  be  called,  THE  LORD  OUR 
RIGHTEOUSNESS." 


OF    CHRIST.  261 


CHAPTER  XI. 


Objections  to  the  Eternal  Sonship  of  our  Lord 
founded  on  assumed  meanings  of  Scripture, 
refuted. 

There  is  one  expression  which  apparently 
militates  against  the  direct  equality,  which 
the  Son  claims  with  the  Father,  particularly 
in  his  attribute  of  omniscience.  Mark  xiii.  32. 
*'  But  of  that  day  and  that  hour  knoweth  no 
man,  no,  not  the  angels  ivhich  are  in  heaven, 
neither  the  Son,  but  the  Father,'^''  Matthew 
xxiv.  36.  "  But  of  that  day  and  hour  knoweth 
no  man,  no,  not  the  angels  of  heaven,  but  my 
Father  only.^"^  Scripture  cannot  contradict 
scripture;  and,  in  order  to  evolve  its  just  and 
rational  meaning,  scripture  must  be  compared 
with  collateral  scripture.  Our  Lord,  in  other 
passages,  when  he  speaks  as  the  Son,  seems  to 
indicate  that  the  knowledge  of  all  transactions 
resides  in  him.  He  says  that  the  Father 
hath  given  him  authority  to  execute  judg- 
ment ; — and  surely  if  he  be  to  execute  judg- 


268  THE    ETERNAL    S0N3HIP 

ment,  he  must  know  ivhen  he  is  to  execute  it  ? 
He  says  that  the  Father  hath  committed  all 
judgment  unto  the  Son;— surely,  then,  the 
Son,  to  whom  judgment  is  committed,  knows 
the  time  in  which  he  is  to  superintend  it  ? 
The  Apostle  says  that  the  Son  "  created  all 
things,"  and  "  by  him  all  things  consist." 
— If  all  things  he  consisting  in,  or  preserved 
by,  the  Son, — surely  the  Son  must  have  know- 
ledge of  the  movements  which  he  himself  di- 
rects? "  All  things  were  created  by  him  and 
for  him ;" — surely,  then,  he  must  know  the 
things  which  exist  for  himself,  and  the  time 
of  those  events,  which  occur  for  himself? 
The  tenor  of  scripture,  especially  in  several 
passages  which  we  have  examined,  evidently 
indicates  that  omniscience  must  belong  to  the 
Son ; — consequently,  that  his  declaration  of 
not  knowing  the  specific  period  when  certain 
events  would  take  place,  must  be  understood 
differently  from  that  meaning  w  hich  the  words 
literally  convey. 

Macknight,  of  whose  very  able  criticisms 
we  have,  in  this  Dissertation,  frequently 
availed  ourselves,  gives  the  following  solution 
of  the  Son's  declaration : — "  Mark  xiii.  32. 
"  For  of  that  day,  &:c. — It  may  seem  strange 
•^  that  the  Son,  who  declared,  that  he  would 


OF    CHRIST.  269 

"  come  before  the  generation  then  in  being 
"  went  off  the  stage,  and  who,  in  the  prophe- 
"  cy,  had  been  pointing  out  the  various  signs 
*'  by  which  the  disciples  might  foresee  his  ap- 
"  proach,  should  not  have  known  the  day  and 
"  the  hour,  or  the  particular  time  of  his  own 
*^  coming.     This   difficulty   some   endeavour 
"  to  obviate  by  supposing  that  our  Lord  spake 
«•  here  of  himself  only  as  a  man.     But  the 
''  name  Father,  following  that  of  Son,  shows 
"  that  he  spake  of  himself  as  the  Son  of  God, 
"  and  not  as  the  Son  of  man.     Besides,  the 
*'  gradation  in  the  sentence  seems  to  forbid 
''  this  solution.    For  the  Son  being  mentioned 
"  after  the  angels,  and  immediately  before  the 
"  Father,  is  thereby  declared  to  be  more  ex- 
••  cellent  than  they,  which  is  not  in  respect  of 
"  his  human  nature  ;  and  therefore  he  cannot 
"  be  supposed  to  speak  of  himself  in  that  na- 
*•  ture.     The  proper  translation  of  the  pas- 
"  sage,  I  think,  affords  abetter  solution.    The 
*•  word  oihiv  here  seems  to  have  the  force  of 
"  the  Hebrew  conjugation  Hiphil,  which,  in 
'*  verbs  denoting  action,  makes   that  action, 
^'  whatever  it  is,  pass  to  another.     Wherefore 
t*  gi<^£w,  which  properly  signifies  I  knoio,  used 
"  in  the  sense  of  the  conjugation  Hiphil,  sig- 
"  nifies  I  make  another  to  knoiv,  I  declare. 
23* 


270  IHE    ETIiRNAL    SONSHIP 

"  The  word  has  this  meaning  without  dis- 
"  pute,  1  Corinthians  ii.  I  determined  (nhvcci) 
"  to  know  nothing  among  you  hut  Jesus 
"  Christy  and  him  crucified,  i.  e.  I  deter- 
''  mined  to  make  known,  to  preach  nothing 
"  among  you  but  Jesus  Christ.  So  likewise 
"  in  the  text :  But  of  that  day  and  that  hour, 
"  none  maketh  you  to  know :  none  hath 
"  power  to  make  you  know  it;  just  as  the 
*'  phrase,  Matthew  xx.  23.  '  is  not  mine  to 
''  give,'  signifies,  '  is  not  in  my  power  to 
"  give  :'  no,  not  the  angels,  neither  the  Son, 
"  but  the  Father ;  neither  man  nor  angel,  nor 
"  even  the  Son  himself,  can  reveal  the  day 
*'  and  hour  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  to 
'*  you ;  because  the  Father  hath  determined 
"  that  it  should  not  be  revealed.  The  Divine 
"  Wisdom  saw  fit  to  conceal  from  the  Apos- 
"  ties  the  precise  period  of  the  destruction  of 
^*  Jerusalem,  in  order  that  they  might  be  laid 
"  under  a  necessity  of  watching  continually. 
"  And  this  vigilance  was  especially  proper  at 
•*  that  time,  because  the  success  of  the  Gospel 
•'  depended,  in  a  great  measure,  upon  the  ac- 
''  tivity  and  exemplary  lives  of  those  who  first 
^'  published  it."  Accordingly,  in  the  verse  of 
1  Cor.  ii.  where  nhy»i  is  used  transitively, 
Locke  paraphrases  the  word,  "  I  resolved  to 


OF    CHRIST.  271 

own  or  show  no  other  knowledge  among 
you,"  and  Whitby,  in  like  manner,  "  I  deter- 
mined not  to  discover  any  thing."  Mac- 
knight,  in  accordance  with  the  foregoing  ob- 
servations, paraphrases  the  verse  in  question, 
(Mark  xiii.  32.)  as  follows :  "  But  of  that  day, 
"  and  that  hour,  knoweth  no  man.  I  have 
"  told  you,  that  all  the  things  I  have  been  pre- 
"  dieting  shall  happen  before  this  generation 
"  dies.  Nevertheless,  to  point  out  the  time  to 
"  you  more  particularly,  by  showing  you  the 
"  precise  year,  and  month,  and  day,  of  the  se- 
**  veral  events,  is  not  in  the  power  of  any 
"  man :  no  man  hath  it  in  his  power  to  make 
"  you  know  this ;  no,  not  the  angels  which 
<*  are  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Fa- 
"  ther  only.  (Matth.)  In  particular  concerning 
"  himself,  Jesus  declared  that  he  could  not 
"  make  them  know  the  day  and  hour  of  his 
*'  coming  to  destroy  Jerusalem,  not  because 
'*  he  was  ignorant  of  that  event,  but  because 
"  the  Father,  as  Governor  of  the  world,  had 
"  put  times  and  seasons  in  his  own  power, 
'*  (Acts  i.  7.)  in  order  that,  from  the  uncer- 
"  tainty  of  the  thing,  the  disciples  might  be  al- 
"  ways  kept  upon  their  guard  ;  for  which  rea- 
*'  son  he  had  given  his  Son  no  commission  to 
"  reveal  it  more  particularly  than  he  has  done 


272  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

"  in  this  celebrated  prediction.  Thus  Jesus 
"  described  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  na- 
"  tion,  marked  a  variety  of  particulars  which 
"  were  to  accompany  or  precede  it,  and  as- 
"  sured  his  disciples  that  the  day  and  hour 
"  thereof  was  not  to  be  discovered  by  them." 
As  the  most  celebrated  critics  admit  that 
tJivxi  must  be  rendered  in  1  Cor  ii.  2,  to  de- 
clare or  make  known,  it  is  impossible  to  refuse 
the  same  meaning  to  the  original  word  trans- 
lated knoweth  in  Matth.  xxiv.  36.  •  Mark  xiii. 
32. — seeing  the  text  absolutely  requires  this 
translation,  to  avoid  the  contradiction  of  pa- 
rallel passages.  It  is  in  vain  to  say  that  such 
a  translation  is  a  blinking  of  the  question,  un- 
less it  can  be  shown  that  all  our  commentators 
are  in  error  when  they  understand  nhvoct — 
rendered  in  the  authorized  version  to  know — 
as  meaning  to  make  known.  Common  sense 
requires  us  to  adopt  this  latter  interpretation 
in  1  Cor.  ii.  2. ;  the  harmony  of  Scripture  re- 
quires us  to  adopt  the  same  meaning  in  the 
passages  quoted  from  the  Gospels.  From  the 
mode  in  which  the  Son  speaks  of  the  Father 
and  addresses  him,  particularly  in  the  xviith 
of  John,  and  from  the  whole  tenor  of  Scrip- 
ture it  appears,  that  during  the  subjection  of 
our  Lord's,  human  nature,  which  was  evinced 


OF    CHRIST.  273 

by  humiliation,  the  Father  was  supreme  in 
the  administration  of  the  kingdom  of  grace 
and  of  the  kingdom  of  the  universe,  until  our 
Lord's  ascension,  when  the  supremacy  of  all 
things  devolved  on  him,  as  the  mediatorial 
King.  In  the  interval  between  the  formation 
of  the  Son's  humanity,  and  his  investiture 
with  universal  rule,  by  the  transference  of  su- 
premacy,— the  direction  of  all  events  was  as- 
sumed and  administered  by  the  Father,  in 
whom  were  centered  all  the  external  displays 
of  Godhead.  Our  Lord,  in  his  Messiahship 
on  earth,  was  under  the  guidance  of  this  su- 
premacy of  rule  by  the  Father.  Hence,  with 
regard  to  the  mission  on  which  he  was  sent, 
and  the  commission  which  was  given  him  to 
execute,  he  says,  "  My  Father  is  greater  than 
I :"  while,  at  the  same  time,  speaking  of  the 
inherent  dignity  of  his  person,  he  exclaims 
"  I  and  my  Father  are  one."  Our  Lord  says 
that  he  was  "  sent," — there  was  "work  given 
him  to  finish," — he  "  came  forth"  on  purpose 
that  he  might  "  fulfil"  all  that  w^as  necessary 
during  the  subjection  of  his  humanity  to  the 
peculiar  superintendence  of  the  Father.  Our 
Lord  says  to  his  followers,  "  It  is  your  Fa- 
ther's good  pleasure  to  give  you  the  kingdom  ;" 
and,  in  the  passage  which  we  have  been  con- 


274       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

sidering,  he  declares, — in  accordance  with  his 
other  enunciations  of  the  Father's  paramount 
government,  during  his  humiliation, — that  the 
time  pf  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  not 
given  to  him  to  reveal  in  his  mission  as  Mes- 
siah, but  was  reserved  for  important  reasons, 
by  the  Father  who,  during  our  Lord's  subjec- 
tion to  him  in  human  nature,  had  "  the  times 
and  the  seasons"  in  his  own  power. 

We  come  now  to  examine  that  passage  in 
which  the  termination  of  Christ's  mediatorial 
kingdom  is  mentioned,  and  to  investigate  the 
meaning  of  the  subjection  of  the  Son,  which 
has  given  rise  to  so  many  contradictory  opi- 
nions. 1  Cor.  XV.  24 — 28,  '^  Then  cometh 
the  end,  when  he  shall  have  delivered  up  the 
kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father;  when  he 
shall  have  put  down  all  rule,  and  all  authority, 
and  power.  For  he  must  reign,  till  he  hath 
put  all  enemies  under  his  feet.  The  last  ene- 
my that  shall  he  destroyed  is  death.  For  he 
hath  put  all  things  under  his  feet.  But  when 
he  saith,  all  things  are  put  under  him,  it  is  ma- 
nifest that  he  is  excepted,  ivhich  did  put  all 
things  under  him.  And  when  all  things  shall 
he  subdued  unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also 
himself  be  subject  unto  him  that  put  all  things 
under  him,  that  God  may  be  all  in  alV 


OF    CHRIST.  275 

It  is  necessary  for  us  to  attend  to  the  pur- 
poses for  which  our  Lord  assumed  human  na- 
ture, and  to  the  achievements  which  have  been, 
and  are  to  be,  accomplished  in  that  nature. 
We  must  attend  to  its  different  situations  at 
different  periods, — which  situations  corres- 
pond with  the  work  that  it  had  to  effect,  and 
the  dignity  with  which  it  was  invested.  The 
states  in  which  our  Lord's  human  nature  has 
hitherto  been,  are  those  of  humiliation  and 
exaltation. 

In  his  state  of  humiliation  he  was  "despised 
and  rejected  of  men," — "  a  man  of  sorrows, 
and  acquainted  with  grief;"  when  men  saw 
him  he  had  ''  no  form  nor  comeliness,"  there 
was  no  "  beauty"  in  him  "  that  we  should 
desire  him."    The  hardships  and  distresses  of 
this  world  pressed  heavily  upon  him ;  his  soul 
was  "  exceeding  sorrowful,  even  unto  death ;" 
one  dark  cloud  continually  hung  over  him, 
whose  gloom  was,  indeed,  at  intervals,  pierced 
by  those  rays  of  Godhead  which  shone  through 
him.     His  actions  were  the  principal  distinc- 
tion between  him  and  those  men  with  whom 
he  associated :  For,  in  his  appearance,  "  his 
visage  was  so  marred  more  than  any  man,  and 
his  form  more  than  the  sons  of  men."    He 
"  made  himself  of  no  reputation,  and  took  up- 


276       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIJP 

on  him  the  form  of  a  servant,  and  was  made 
in  the  likeness  of  men :  and  being  found  in 
fashion  as  a  man,  he  humbled  himself,  and  be- 
came obedient  unto  death,  even  the  death  of 
the  cross."  In  this  state,  the  humanity  of  our 
Lord  was  subject  to  the  Father  and  the  other 
persons  of  the  Godhead,  and  it  was  subject,  in 
a  manner  visible  to  mankind.  They  beheld 
the  external  marks  of  its  subjection ;  they  per- 
ceived his  appearance  in  the  flesh, — suffering, 
and  exposed  to,  the  calamities  of  life.  Its  as- 
pect towards  men  was  that  of  one  who  under- 
went difficulties  for  some  specific  purpose, — 
who  endured  woes  to  obtain  an  important  re- 
sult,— whose  griefs  were  the  portion  of  a  mag- 
nificent design.  The  mode  in  which  the  sub- 
jection of  our  Lord's  humanity  was  displayed, 
was  in  sufferings.  It  might  have  exhibited 
grandeur  of  the  most  elevated  description,  and 
still  have  been  subject  to  the  Godhead ;  it 
might  have  been  surrounded  by  legions  of  an- 
gels, and  still  have  fulfilled  the  plans  of  omni- 
potence. But  this  was  not  the  way  in  which 
the  Divine  measures  were  to  be  effected. 
"  Wherefore  in  all  things  it  behoved  him  to 
be  made  like  unto  his  brethren,  that  he  might 
be  a  merciful  and  faithful  High  Priest  in 
things  pertaining  to  God,  to  make  reconcilia- 


OP  CHRIST.  277 

tion  for  the  sins  of  the  people.  For  in  that  he 
himself  hath  suffered  being  tempted,  he  is  able 
to  succour  them  that  are  tempted."  "  For  it 
became  him,  for  whom  are  all  things,  and  by 
whom  are  all  things,  in  bringing  many  sons 
unto  glory,  to  make  the  captain  of  their  sal- 
vation perfect  through  sufferings."  Being 
subject,  in  the  purpose  of  God,  his  subjection 
was  manifested  by  sufferings,  that  through 
these  sufferings  a  revenue  of  glory  might  be 
subsequently  derived.  In  our  present  state  of 
humanity,  humiliation  and  accompanying  suf- 
ferings are,  in  the  well  regulated  mind,  wisely 
connected  with  the  ultimate  progress  of  piety, 
and  the  establishment  of  real  greatness  in  the 
soul.  It  were  needless  to  expatiate  on  the 
firmness  which  they  are  calculated  to  promote 
in  disastrous  vicissitudes, — the  benevolence 
which  they  infuse  by  producing  sympathy  for 
others, — the  reliance  which  they  excite  on  the 
Supreme  Being  who  orders  all  things  for  the 
best, — and  the  expectations  which  they  induce 
us  to  form  of  another  and  a  better  scene  of 
existence.  We  have,  in  mankind,  abundant 
proofs  of  the  utility  of  sufferings.  Though 
we  cannot  tell  the  primary  reasons  why  Christ 
was,  in  this  respect,  made  "  like  unto  his 
brethren,"  we  evidently  feel  the  advantages 
24 


278  THE    ETERNAL    SOjNSHIP 

which  result  to  us  from  this  conformity.  As 
the  humanity  of  our  Lord  was  formed  for  the 
express  purpose  of  existing  in  his  Divinity, — 
it  was  formed,  in  an  especial  manner,  to  as- 
sume the  appearances  and  subjection  conso- 
nant to  the  designs  of  Divinity.  It  had  no 
will  of  its  own  to  assume  any  state ;  it  had  no 
inherent  constitution  to  exist  in  any  condition 
which  was  its  own  ;  it  could  only  exist,  ac- 
cording to  the  volition  of  Divinity  founded  on 
the  Divine  constitution.  The  subjection  in 
its  humiliation  was,  therefore,  of  two  kinds, 
— a  necessary  subjection  to  the  Godhead,  in 
whatever  condition  it  existed  ;  and  a  pecu- 
liar subjection,  indicated  by  its  sufferings  in 
that  particular  state  of  humiliation.  In  rela- 
tion to  God,  this  subjection  was  a  devotion  to 
the  Divine  will,  and  a  particular  devotion  to 
that  person  in  whom  it  subsisted.  This  devo- 
tion was  essential  to  its  very  nature,  and  com- 
municated in  its  original  conformation.  Whilst 
its  actions  on  earth  were  really  those  of  huma- 
nity,—  they  were  those  of  humanity  Avhose 
procedure  was  in  union  with  a  Divine  person. 
They  flowed  from  that  person,  and  were  really 
his ;  yet  they  w-ere  not  the  actions  of  his  Divi- 
nity, but  of  his  humanity  subsisting  in  his  Di- 
vine nature.    The  Son  of  God  could  not  suffer 


OF    CHRIST.  279 

in  his  essential  nature ;  yet  his  assumed  human 
nature  was  humbled,  was  "  made  under  the 
law;"  was  "made  a  curse  for  us:  for  it  is 
written,  Cursed  is  every  one  that  hangeth  on 
a  tree."  But  whilst  the  Messiah  experienced 
this  temporary  humiliation,  the  inherent  glory 
of  his  person  was  not,  and  could  not  be,  lost. 
This  humiliation  was  not  natural  to  him,  but 
was  submitted  to,  that  the  glory  which  was 
natural  to  a  being  received  into  personal  union 
by  one  of  the  persons  of  the  Godhead,  might 
afterwards  be  exhibited.  When,  therefore, 
the  eclipse  of  the  Messiah's  human  nature 
was  past,  it  appeared  in  that  splendour  which 
it  naturally  possessed,  and  which  was  peculiar 
to  its  exalted  state  of  existence.  When  he 
"  ascended  up  on  high,"  after  his  w^oes  on 
earth,  "  he  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  till  all  his  enemies  should  be  made  his 
footstool."  Then  the  full  effulgence  of  Deity 
beamed  through  it,  when,  in  the  evolution  of 
his  purpose,  the  Father  of  glory  "  raised  him 
from  the  dead,  and  set  him  at  his  own  right 
hand,  in  the  heavenly  places,  far  above  all  prin- 
cipality, and  power,  and  might,  and  dominion, 
and  every  name  that  is  named,  not  only  m  this 
world,  but  also  in  that  which  is  to  come  :  and 
hath  put  all  things  under  his  feet,   and  gave 


^80  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

him  to  be  the  head  over  all  things  to  the 
Church,  which  is  his  body,  the  fuhiess  of  him 
that  fiUeth  all  in  all."  The  Son  represents 
himself  as  possessing  inherent  power  to  lay 
down  his  life,  and  power  to  take  it  up  again. 
John  X.  17,  18.  "  Therefore  doth  my  Father 
love  me,  because  I  lay  down  my  life,  that  I 
might  take  it  again.  No  man  taketh  it  from 
me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  myself.  I  have 
power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  power  to 
take  it  again.  This  commandment  have  I  re- 
ceived of  my  Father."  In  the  first  of  these 
passages,  quoted  from  the  epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  it  is  expressly  said  that  the  Father 
jaised  the  humanity  of  our  Lord  from  the 
dead  ;  in  the  latter,  the  Son  asserts  that  that 
power  is  inherent  in  himself.  The  Son  can- 
not speak  of  his  human  nature,  as  having  the 
power  of  raising  itself  from  the  dead,  inhe- 
ring m  itself.  For  no  such  power  of  com- 
municating life  to  itself  when  the  vital  energy 
has  ceased,  can  be  inherent  in  any  creature; 
seeing  it  is  the  peculiar  power  of  the  Deity  to 
communicate  life  to  his  creatures.  It  must, 
therefore,  be  resident  in  the  nature  in  which 
our  Lord  is  essentially  Son,  and  be  true  in  his 
Divinity,  in  which  his  human  nature  exists. 
The   humiliation   of  this   human   nature   is, 


OF    CHRIST.  281 

therefore,  in  conformity  with  the  volition  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son.  As  it  respects  the 
Father,  it  is  a  subjection  of  humiliation  under 
him,  as  supreme,  because  this  nature  does  not 
belong  to  his  person  ; — it  is  the  subjection  of 
the  Son,  because  this  is  the  Son's  human  na- 
ture, in  which  he  wills  that  there  shall  be  sub- 
jection. 

The  exaltation  of  this  human  nature,  in  the 
mediatorial  kingdom,  is  an  exaltation  from 
which  subjection  is  excluded.  Subjection  is 
excluded,  because  the  Son  reigns  supreme 
over  this  kingdom  ;  it  is  given  solely  to  him 
by  the  Father;  it  is  administered  by  the  Son, 
in  such  a  manner,  that,  though  the  supremacy 
of  the  Godhead  is  unaffected,  that  supremacy 
is  devolved  on  the  Son.  Universal  power  is 
lodged  in  him,  and  this  universal  power  is  ex- 
erted through  the  medium,  and  by  the  instru- 
mentality, of  his  humanity.  In  this  humanity, 
when  on  the  eve  of  assuming  his  mediatorial 
sway,  he  says,  "  All  power  is  given  unto  me 
in  heaven  and  in  earth."  Respecting  this  hu- 
manity he  declared,  that  its  resurrection,  the 
inception  of  his  greatness,  was  effected  by  his 
own  energy.  The  Father  is  declared  to  have 
exerted  his  energy  in  this  inception;  for  he 
raised  him  from  the  dead,  and  delivered  up  to 
24* 


282        THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

the  Son  an  undivided  and  complete  supremacj > 
in  the  mediatorial  administration.  In  this  ex- 
altation, the  Father  is  expressly  said  to  have 
invested  the  Son  with  this  micontrolled  rule. 
*'  Wherefore  God  hath  highly  exalted  him,  and 
given  him  a  name  which  is  above  every  name : 
That  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should 
bow,  of  things  in  heaven,  and  things  in  earth, 
and  things  under  the  earth;  and  that  every 
tongue  should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father."  The 
subjection  of  all  things  to  Jesus  is,  therefore, 
a  subjection  to  the  Son,  in  his  human  nature; 
which  is  more  especially  called  Jesus,  because 
it  was  the  means  appointed  to  procure  salva- 
tion. The  surrender  of  all  rule  was  made  by 
the  Father  to  the  Son,  who  accepted  of  that 
surrender,  and  exercises  his  sway  through  the 
human  nature,  which  is  the  medium  of  his 
Kingship.  The  Kingly  authority  which  be- 
longed to  the  humanity,  in  consequence  of  its 
union  with  Deity,  was  in  abeyance  during  its 
continuance  on  earth; — when  the  surround- 
ing veil  of  humiliation  was  withdrawn,  its  na- 
tive dignity  burst  forth ; — but  the  climax  of  its 
grandeur  was  attained,  when  the  Son  received 
the  universal  government,  and,  through  the 
nature  which  was  employed  to  effect  salvation. 


OF   CHRIST.  283 

dispensed  the  universal  government.  In  this 
mediatorial  kingdom,  the  humanity  of  the  Son 
is,  in  one  sense,  subject  to  the  Father,  because 
it  is  a  creature ;  yet,  in  another  sense,  it  is 
not  subject.  For  the  kingdom  is  peculiarly 
the  Son's,  who  is  subject  to  none ;  and  his 
humanity  is  the  creature,  through  which  he 
organizes  the  procedure  of  his  kingdom.  The 
sole  reign  of  the  Son  may,  therefore,  be 
viewed  in  two  lights :  It  is  strictly  and  prima- 
rily, the  reign  of  the  Divine  nature  ;  and  it  is, 
secondarily,  the  reign  of  the  Son  in  human 
nature,  because  his  humanity  is  the  medium 
by  which  he  displays  his  reign.  The  proceed- 
ings of  this  kingdom  will  "put  down  all  rule, 
and  all  authority,  and  power.  For  he  must 
reign,  till  he  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his 
feet:' 

Prophecy  will  be  fulfilled  ;  for  according 
to  the  prediction  (in  Psalm  viii.  6.)  ''  He  hath 
put  all  things  under  his  feet.  But  when  he 
saith,  All  things  are  put  under  him,  it  is  mani- 
fest that  he  is  excepted,  ivhich  did  put  all  things 
under  him:'  The  Father  gave  to  the  Son  all 
rule,  but  could  not  give  himself  to  be  ruled. 
He  only  ceased  actively  to  exert  his  own  ex- 
ternal power  in  the  supreme  administration  of 
the  mediatorial  kingdom,  and  gave  to  the  Son, 


284       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

solely^  the  externa/ manifestations  of  Godhead. 
The  inherent  power  and  perfections  of  the  Fa- 
ther could  not  cease,  but  the  display  of  these 
is  entirely  dependent  on  the  nature  and  will 
of  God.  He  therefore,  for  infinitely  wise 
purposes,  has  revealed  that  all  the  external 
displays  of  Godhead,  in  the  mediatorial  king-r 
dom,  are  from  the  person  of  the  Son,  who 
chooses  that  his  human  nature  shall  be  the 
medium  of  these   displays. 

When  the  objects  of  the  mediatorial  king- 
dom are  accomplished  by  the  Son — when 
"  all  thmgs  shall  be  subdued  unto  him,  then 
shall  the  Son  himself  be  subject  unto  him  that 
put  all  things  under  him,  that  God  may  be  all 
in  alV  To  understand  in  what  the  subjection 
of  the  Son  consists,  it  is  necessary  again  to 
revert  to  the  different  states  of  the  Son's  hu- 
manity.— He  was  subject  to  the  Father  in  his 
humiliation,  because  it  was  in  the  designs  of 
the  Godhead  that  he  should  be  thus  subject; 
he  was  not  subject  to  the  Father  in  his  human 
nature  in  the  mediatorial  kingdom  and  exalta- 
tion, because  the  humanity  subsisted  in  the  Son, 
who  was  not  subject  to  the  Father,  but  had 
the  means  of  subjecting  all  things  lodged  in 
himself:  these  means  he  employs  through  the 
human  nature,  which  is  his  subjecting  instru- 


OF    CHRIST.  285 

ment.  But  when  the  end  of  the  mediatorial 
kingdom  shall  come,  the  instrument  which  he 
employed,  viz.  his  human  nature,  will  cease 
to  be  his  medium  of  power,  and  return  to  the 
state  of  subjection  to  the  Father  in  which  it 
was  in  his  humiliation ; — not,  however,  to  be 
again  exposed  to  degradation ;  for  the  cessa- 
tion of  all  displays  of  authority  hy  it  and 
through  it  will  ensue.  The  kingdom  of  the 
universe  will  no  more  be  exclusively  in  the 
Son,  but  in  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost, 
— in  God,  "  that  God  may  he  all  in  alV^  The 
human  nature  of  our  Lord  has  two  aspects ; — 
by  the  Son,  it  is  iemployed  as  the  means  by 
W'hich  he  reigns, — by  his  subjects,  it  is  em- 
ployed as  the  means  through  which  they  ex- 
press their  devotion  to  him.  Neither  the  go- 
vernor nor  the  governed  will,  after  the  com- 
pletion of  that  kingdom,  employ  any  medium. 
The  humanity  of  the  Son,  we  may  justly  pre- 
sume, will  be  placed  in  the  situation  in  which 
it  would  have  been,  had  there  been  no  media- 
torial kingdom,  and  no  exclusive  authority- 
vested  in  the  person  in  whom  it  subsists. 
Like  all  other  creatures,  it  will  be  subjected 
to  the  Godhead,  retaining  the  glory  which  it 
can  never  lose, — miion  to  that  person  in 
whom  it  suffered,  in  whom  it  was  employed 


286  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

to  dispense  the  mediatorial  sway,  and  in  whom 
it  will,  through  eternity,  be  the  object  which 
will  possess  the  renown  of  having  been  em- 
ployed to  establish  and  complete  the  media- 
torial kingdom.  The  glorious  beings  brought 
to  everlasting  felicity  in  the  exercise  of  Mes- 
siah's kingdom  will,  then,  immediately  ad- 
dress the  Godhead,  and  from  it  receive  com- 
munications of  increasing  happiness.  —  The 
humanity  of  our  Lord,  in  those  ages  whose 
arcana  are  not  revealed,  will  still  exist,  and 
exist  in  union  with  that  person  who  assumed 
it.  The  particular  manner  of  its  actions,  and 
the  connexion  between  it  and  other  beings, 
are  alluded  to,  yet  not  specifically  declared. 
In  the  Revelation  of  John,  when  all  the  tran- 
sactions of  the  mediatorial  kingdom  were  re- 
presented as  finished,  and  the  new  heavens 
and  the  new  earth  established,  he  saw  no 
temple  in  the  great  and  holy  city,  "  for  the 
Lord  God  Almighty  and  the  Lamb  are  the 
temple  of  it.  And  the  city  had  no  need  of  the 
sun,  neither  of  the  moon,  to  shine  in  it :  for 
the  glory  of  God  did  lighten  it,  and  the  Lamb 
is  the  light  thereof.  And  the  nations  of  them 
wdiich  are  saved  shall  walk  in  the  light  of  it." 
He  declares  that  its  "  light"  or  splendour 
flows    from  "  the  glory  of  God  which  does 


OF    CHRIST.  287 

lighten  it,"  and  says  that  "  the  Lamb  is  the 
light  thereof,"  not  that  lie  does  lighten  it. 
There  "  the  pure  river  of  the  water  of  life" 
flows  from  "  the  throne  of  God  and  of  the 
Lamb."  "  And  there  shall  be  no  more  curse; 
but  the  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb  shall 
be  in  it ;  and  his  servants  shall  serve  him," — 
i.  e.  the  servants  of  God  shall  serve  him. 
•'  And  they  shall  see  his  face ;  and  his  name 
shall  be  in  their  foreheads.  And  there  shall 
be  no  night  there ;  and  they  need  no  candle, 
neither  light  of  the  sun;  for  the  Lord  God 
giveth  them  light :  and  they  shall  reign  for 
ever  and  ever." 

The  particular  mode  in  which  the  huma- 
nity of  the  Son  shall  exhibit  the  glory  of  its 
Divine  union,  when  it  is  subjected  in  the 
kingdom  of  the  Godhead's  glory,  is  not  de- 
scribed. But,  from  these  passages,  it  seems 
evident,  that  it  will  be  a  transcendent  mani- 
festation of  Divine  glory,  flowing,  more  im- 
mediately, from  the  Son,  and  subordinate  to 
the  Deity,  in  his  eternal  powder  and  God- 
head. 


288  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 


CHAPTER  XIL 


The  Word  and  The  Son  are  both  designa- 
tions to  which  eternity  is  attributable. 

Many  who  contend  that  the  Eternal  Son- 
ship  of  our  Lord  is  unscriptural,  affirm  that 
the  true  designation  of  the  person  of  the 
Godhead  who  came  in  the  flesh,  is  Aoyo?,  Lo- 
gos, The  Word,  It  is  neither  our  intention 
nor  our  province  to  review  the  learned  obser- 
vations which  have  been  made  respecting  the 
exact  meaning  of  the  term  Logos,  and  the 
manner  in  which  it  has  been  used  by  the  Pla- 
tonic and  Jewish  Philosophers.  It  is  suffi- 
cient for  our  purpose  to  remark  that  it  signi- 
fies The  Word,  as  it  is  rendered  by  all  trans- 
lators in  John  i,, — and  Discourse  and  Reason, 
in  classical  authors,  and  some  few  passages 
of  scripture.  The  latter  meaning  answers 
more  especially  to  the  import  of  (ro(pioc,  Wis- 
dom, in  Proverbs  viii.  But  in  whatever  shade 
of  acceptation  the  expression  is  understood, 


OF    CHRIST.  289 

the  sense  of  the  context  and  the  mode  of  de- 
scription, undoubtedly  require  us  to  under- 
stand a  person  who  is  mentioned  under  this 
designation.  The  term,  when  signifying  The 
Word,  whether  understood  in  its  original  de- 
rivation or  in  its  general  use,  expresses  a  de- 
claration or  communication  of  thought,  by 
such  a  medium  as  the  person  employing 
it  shall  enable  another  to  comprehend  his 
thoughts.  When  applied  to  a  person,  it  re- 
presents him  who,  as  an  agent,  declares  or 
communicates  the  thoughts  of  one  person  to 
another.  Applied  to  a  Divine  person,  there 
is  no  conceivable  combination  of  our  notions, 
which  will  permit  us,  when  we  analyze  the 
term,  to  understand  any  other  than  a  person 
thus  described,  on  account  of  the  quality  of 
declaring  or  communicating  which  he  pos- 
sesses. Campbell,  when  examining  the  in- 
terpretation Reason,  which  has  been  assigned 
to  Logos,  says  of  the  common  translation. 
The  Word, — "  But  as  the  common  rendering, 
"  which  is  also  not  without  its  plausibility, 
"  has  had  the  concurrent  testimony  of  trans- 
"  lators,  ancient  as  well  as  modern,  and  seems 
"  well  adapted  to  the  office  of  Messiah,  as  the 
"  oracle  and  interpreter  of  God,  I  thought  it, 
"  upon  the  whole,  better  to  retain  it."  The 
25 


290       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIF 

meaning  of  the  expression  The  Word,  must 
convey  the  combined  notion  of  a  Divine  per- 
son, and  the  inherent  quality  of  communica- 
ting v\^hich  he  possesses,  from  which  quality 
the  name  is  obtained.  But  The  Word  does 
not  express  a  state  of  existence,  according  to 
the  nature  of  the  person  whom  it  represents  ; 
it  is  not  like  the  expressions  Man,  Father, 
Son,  descriptive  of  a  certain  state  of  being,  in 
a  certain  nature.  We  can  readily  compre- 
hend the  attribute  of  the  person  who  is  The 
Word,  on  account  of  which  attribute  he  is  so 
named,  but  we  obtain  no  idea  of  the  state  in 
which  the  Divine  nature  exists,  in  that  per- 
son, who  is  The  Word.  Whereas,  the  ex- 
pression Son,  determinately  marks  the  state 
in  which  the  person  thus  called  exists,  in  re- 
lation to  the  other  persons  of  the  Divine  na- 
ture. It  appears  strange,  that  the  opponents 
of  the  Eternal  Sonship  should  fix  on  a  term, 
expressive  of  no  state  in  the  Divine  nature, 
as  the  eternal, and  appropriate  name  of  this 
person  in  the  Godtead,  whilst  they  reject  one 
which  is  decisively  and  peculiarly  applicable 
to  the  state  of  being  of  this  person  in  relation 
to  another. — But  such  is  the  effect  of  adhe- 
rence to  a  favourite  theory,  when  it  is  requi- 
site to  carry  it  over  all  obstacles.     By  these 


or  CHRIST.  291 

remarks,  we  cannot  be  understood  to  affirm 
that  The  Word  is  not  expressive  of  a  Divine 
person; — we  only  assert,  that  whilst  it  un- 
doubtedly indicates  a  Divine  person,  it  dis- 
closes him  in  the  possession  of  a  certain  at- 
tribute,— not  in  his  related  state  of  existence 
in  the  Divine  nature.  But  our  opponents 
admit  the  eternal  existence  of  the  Logos  m 
the  Godhead,  and  allow  that  he  essentially 
exists  in  the  Divine  nature;  —  our  object, 
therefore,  is  to  prove  that  this  Logos  must, 
in  his  state  of  existence  in  the  Divine  nature, 
be  also  the  Son  of  God.  In  this  attempt,  we 
shall  endeavour  to  show,  that  w^hatever  attri- 
butes and  actions,  peculiar  to  Divinity,  are  as- 
signed to  Logos  or  The  Word, — these  are  al- 
so assigned  to  the  Son, 

John  i.  1.  "  The  Word  ivas  ivith  God,''' 
Co-existence  with  God,  in  the  person  of  the 
Father,  is  predicated  of  the  Son.  John  i. 
18.  "  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time  ; 
the  only-begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him."  John 
xvii.  5.  "  And  now^,  O  Father,  glorify  thou 
me  with  thine  own  self  w  ith  the  glory  which 
I  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was.  v.  24. 
For  thou  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world." 


292       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

Johni.  1.  "And  The  Word  was  God:'  The 
Son  is,  in  like  manner,  termed  God,  and  that 
expressly  by  the  Father.  Hebrews  i.  8.  "  But 
unto  the  Son,  he  saith,  Thy  throne,  O  God, 
is  for  ever  and  ever :  a  sceptre  of  righteous- 
ness is  the  sceptre  of  thy  kingdom." 

V.  2,  3.  "  The  same  was  in  the  heginning 
with  God,  All  things  were  made  by  him; 
and  without  him  ivas  not  any  thing  made  that 
was  made^"^  The  Son  is  thus  addressed  by 
God  the  Father,  in  Hebrews  i.lO. :  "And 
thou,  Lord,  in  the  beginning,  hast  laid  the 
foundation  of  the  earth  ;  and  the  heavens  are 
the  work  of  thine  hands."  Of  the  Son  it  is 
said,  in  Colossians  i.  16 — 18.  "For  by  him 
were  all  things  created,  that  are  in  heaven, 
and  that  are  in  earth,  visible  and  invisible, 
whether  they  be  thrones,  or  dominions,  or 
principalities,  or  powers  :  all  things  were  cre- 
ated by  him  and  for  him  :  and  he  is  before 
all  things,  and  by  him  all  things  consist.  And 
he  is  the  head  of  the  body,  the  Church ;  who 
is  the  beginning, " 

V.  4.  "In  him  was  life;  and  the  life  was 
the  light  ofmen^'  Of  the  Son,  it  is  said,  1 
John  V.  11,  12.  "  And  this  is  the  record,  that 
God  hath  given  to  us  eternal  life  ;  and  this 
life  is  in  his  Son.    He  that  hath  the  Son,  hath 


OF    CHRIST.  293 

life;  and  he  that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God, 
hath  not  life."  John  v  26.  "  For  as  the  Fa- 
ther hath  life  in  himself;  so  hath  he  given 
to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself."  John  x. 
17,  18.  "  Therefore  doth  my  Father  love  me, 
because  I  lay  down  my  life,  that  I  might  take 
it  again.  No  man  taketh  it  from  me ;  but  I 
lay  it  down  of  myself.  I  have  power  to  lay 
it  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it  again." 
John  xii.  46.  "  I  am  come  a  light  into  the 
world,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  me  should 
not  abide  in  darkness." 

V.  11, 12.  "  jHfe  came  unto  his  own,  and  his 
own  received  him  not.  But  as  many  as  re- 
ceived  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  hecoyne 
the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on 
his  name,'^''  In  like  manner  it  is  said,  John  vi. 
40.  "  And  this  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me, 
that  every  one  which  seeth  the  Son,  and  be- 
lieveth on  him,  may  have  everlasting  life:  and 
I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day."  1  John 
V.  1.  "  AVhosoever  believeth  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  is  born  of  God." 

V.  14.  ''And  the  Word  was  made  flesh,  and 
dwelt  among  iis/^  Analagous  to  this  are  the 
words  of  1  John  i.  1.  *'  That  which  was  from 
the  beginning,  which  we  have  heard,  which 
we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  which  we  have 


294       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIF 

looked  upon  and  our  hands  have  handled,  of 
the  Word  of  life :  2.  (For  the  life  was  mani- 
fested,  ")     In  like  manner,  the  Son  was 

made  flesh,  and  was  manifested.  Galatians 
iv.  4.  "  But  when  the  fulness  of  the  time 
was  come,  God  sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of 
a  woman."  Romans  viii.  3.  "  For  what  the 
law  could  not  do,  in  that  it  was  weak  through 
the  flesh,  God  sending  his  own  Son,  in  the 
likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin,  con- 
demned sin  in  the  flesh."  1  John.  iii.  8.  "  For 
this  purpose  the  Son  of  God  was  manifested, 
that  he  might  destroy  the  works  of  the 
devil." 

After  the  declaration  of  these  actions  and 
attributes  of  the  Logos,  all  of  which,  we  have 
shown,  are  also  predicated  of  the  Son,  the 
writer  sums  up  his  detail  with  the  glory  of 
the  Logos,  which  he  affirms  is  the  same  glory 
as  that  which  the  Son  possesses. 

V.  14.  "  And  we  beheld  his  glory,  the  glory 
as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father, ^^  The 
particle  '«?  as,  expresses,  in  the  original,  more 
than  likeness  or  similarity.  It  denotes  that 
which  is  indeed  or  really  an  identical  pos- 
session of  what  has  been  mentioned.  Mac- 
knight,  in  his  Fourth  Essay,  prefixed  to  the 
Translation  of  the  Epistles,  says,  under  the 


OF    CHRIST.  295 

particle  wr, — *•  n?  is  sometimes  used  affirm a- 
"  tivelv,  and  must  be  translated  indeed^  truly ^ 
"  certainly^  actually;  for  Hesjchius  and  Pha- 
"  vorinus  tell  us,   that  'w?  is  put  for   ovtw?, 

"  oe.Kv\^ugJ^     Nehemiall  vii.  2.   f  Auto?  'w?  a,)!^ 

''  o6A>jO>j$-,  He  was  indeed  a  true  man. — Matth. 
"  xiv.  5.  He  feared  the  multitude,  because  they 
"  counted  him  (John,  'a>«-  7r^&)(pvjT»jf)  really  a 
"  prophet. — John  i.  14.  We  beheld  his  glory, 
^^  the  glory,  ('&>?  povop/svjj?)  indeed  of  the  only 
"  begotten  of  the  Father.^^  According  to  this 
import  of  the  particle  'cog,  Doddridge  thus 
paraphrases  the  passage  : — "  And  we  who  are 
**  now  recording  these  things,  contemplated 
"  his  glory  with  so  strict  an  attention,  that, 
"  from  our  own  personal  knowledge,  we  can 
"  bear  our  testimony  to  it,  that  it  was  in 
"  every  respect  such  a  glory  as  became  the  only 
*'  begotten  of  the  Father, "^"^  Guyse  states,  in 
a  note,  the  true  signification  of  the  particle 
'«? ;  and  paraphrases  the  passage  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner :  ''  We  saw  the  glory  of  his 
"  Divine  wisdom,  power,  holiness,  and  grace, 
"  which,  on  various  occasions,  displayed 
"  themselves  in  him  ;  we  saw  the  glory  of  his 
*'  God-like  miracles,  and  of  his  sovereign  way 

■    Really^  truly.  t  Septuagint. 


296       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

"  of  performing  them  ;  we  saw  the  glory  that 
"  shone  in  his  transfiguration,  resurrection, 
"  and  ascension  to  heaven ;  (ikx(rcc>fAi^oc)  we 
"  steadfastly  considered  and  observed  it  with 
"  the  closest  attention,  and  highest  wonder, 
"  as  the  glory  that  was  really  becoming  the 
"  Son  of  God,  and  was  proper  and  peculiat 
"  to  him,  who  is  originally  the  same  in  nature 
"  with  the  Father,  and  eternally  begotten  of 
"  him,  in  such  an  inconceivable  manner,  as 
**  none  ever  besides  him."  As,  the  precise 
meaning  of  the  Evangelist  is  of  particular  im- 
portance, we  refer  to  Acts  xvii.  22.  Rom.  ix. 
32.  2  Cor.  ii.  17.  Eph.  v.  8.,  in  addition  to 
the  passages  we  have  before  mentioned,  where 
the  particle  *w?  has  the  same  meaning  as  in 
the  text  which  we  are  examining.  The  14th 
V.  of  the  1st  chap,  of  John,  obviously  esta- 
blishes the  collateral  actions  and  attributes, 
especially  the  glorj'  of  The  Word,  ^nd  the 
only  begotten  of  the  Father. 

We  have  shown,  from  parallel  texts  of 
scripture,  that  every  declaration,  which  main- 
tains the  eternity,  and  other  natural  and  mo- 
ral qualities  of  the  Word,  maintains  also  the 
eternity  and  natural  and  moral  qualities  of  the 
Son  of  God.     Co-existence  with   God  the 


OF    CHRIST.  297 

Father, — tlie  being  God, — the  creation  of  all 
things, — inherence  of  life,— power  of  intro- 
duction to  God's  family, — manifestation  in 
the  flesh,  are  all  ascribed  to  The  Word  and 
to  the  Son  of  God  ;  and  lastly,  the  Evangelist 
declares  their  identity,  or  that  The  Word  and 
the  Son  are  the  same  person,  as  the  glory 
which  is  predicated  of  the  person  under  each 
designation,  is  the  same  glory.  That  which 
is  true  of  The  Word  is,  therefore,  true  of  the 
Son.     He  is,  consequently,  Eternal, 


298  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


Examination  of  the  term  Father,  in  connexion 
ivith  the  term  Son,  ivhen  used  to  designate 
Persons  in  the  Divine  nature,' 

God  is  frequently  termed,  in  Scripture,  a 
Father^  on  account  of  the  relation  in  which 
he  stands  to  men  in  their  creation  and  pre- 
servation. The  creative  power, — the  care 
and  protection  which  he  continually  exer- 
cises,— the  inception  of  life  which  inheres  in 
him, — and  the  watchful  superintendence  by 
which  he  continues  in  the  individual,  and  in 
succession,  the  life  which  he  has  communi- 
cated,— are  the  causes  of  this  appellation. 
He  is,  likewise,  termed  Father,  on  account 
of  the  principles  of  holiness  and  virtue  which 
are  peculiarly  derived  from  himself,  and  which 
he  implants  in  the  minds  of  intelligent  beings. 
This  residence  and  exercise  of  virtuous  prin- 
ciples are  the  sources  of  well-regulated  life. 


OF    CHRIST.  299 

and  of  perpetual  enjoyment;  they  are  the 
well-being  and  happiness  of  the  soul.  The 
infusion  of  such  principles  into  those  who 
have  lost  them,  is  termed  a  "  new  life,"  a 
"new  birth"  obtained  from  God,  "the  author 
of  every  good  and  perfect  gift."  This  title 
is  given  to  God,  on  account  of  the  govern- 
ment or  rule  which  he  exercises,  and  the  di- 
rection which  he  possesses  of  "  all  his  crea- 
tures, and  all  their  actions."  It  denotes  the 
ineffable  honour  and  dignity  which  he  enjoys 
— which  essentially  belong  to  him — and  which 
are  manifested  in  his  government  of  all  events. 
God  is  termed  Father,  because  he  instructs 
and  enlightens  his  creatures.  He  is  the  source 
of  knowledge  as  well  as  of  being ;  from  him 
we  obtain  the  powers  that  enable  us  to  ex- 
plore useful  knowledge;  and,  from  himself 
immediately  comes  the  most  important  of  all 
knowledge  which  is  received  and  treasured 
up  by  the  appropriate  mental  faculties  that 
he  has  originally  conferred.  He  is  termed  Fa- 
ther, on  account  of  the  peculiar  and  distin- 
guished regard  and  rule  which  he  exercises 
over  those  to  whom  he  reveals  himself,  in 
another  manner  than  he  does  to  the  world. 
These  are  more  particularly  denominated  his 
children,  because  he  favours  them  with  his 


300  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

regard,  guides  them  by  his  counsel,  supports 
them  by  his  power,  guards  them  from  evil, 
conducts  them  through  life,  and  after  death 
receives  them  into  glory. 

In  all  the  cases  which  we  have  mentioned, 
we  readily  discover  the  reasons  why  God  is 
termed  a  Father.  We  recognize  the  trans- 
ference of  figurative  notions  in  the  transac- 
tions of  men,  to  the  procedure  of  God;  for 
we  cannot  suppose  that  God  is  related  to  the 
objects  we  have  mentioned,  as  earthly  fathers 
are  to  their  children.  They  do  not  partici- 
pate of  his  essence ;  they  are  not  possessors 
of  his  Divine  nature ;  nor  do  they,  in  that 
nature,  enjoy  propinquity  or  relationship  in 
the  same  mode  of  being.  We  are  able  to 
determine  the  relative  situations  of  the  par- 
ties, and  to  perceive  the  exact  place  which 
objects  occupy,  when  God  is  termed  their 
Father.  We  determine  that  the  beings  pre- 
dicated cannot  be  his  sons,  and  that  he  can- 
not be  their  Father  in  consequence  of  mutual 
possession  of  the  same  essence,  because  all 
those  objects  to  whom  God  is  Father,  are  ex- 
traneous to  the  Divine  essence.  They  are 
extraneous  to  his  nature,  because  it  is  eter- 
nal ;  they  have  a  beginning,  and  that  which 
has  a  beginning  can  neither  be  the  Divine 


OF    CHRIST.  oOl 

essence,  nor,  even  if  we  could  suppose  the 
possibility  of  division  in  the  Divine  essence, 
can  they  be  a  portion  of  that  essence.     It  is 
the  possession  of  this  beghming  of  being,  and 
of  nintability  in  being,  which  shows  the  utter 
impossibility  of  an  eternal,  infinite,  immutable 
essence  being  portioned  through  space,  and 
modified  into  different  creatures,  as  some  phi- 
losophic  speculators   have  asserted.      While 
the  Father  of  the  universe  is  omnipresent  and 
omniscient,  he  is  not,  and  from  his  essential 
nature,  cannot  be  the  to  t:av  of  the  universe, 
in  the  acceptation  of  some  of  the  Grecian  and 
later  cosmogonists.     We  ascertain,  therefore, 
that  God  is  Father  of  the  universe,  in  a  man- 
ner which  does  not  admit  of  relation  in  his 
essence.     The    objects   of   the   universe,    to 
whom  he  is  Father,  are  without  his  essence ; 
they  are  not  sxd  generis;  they  exist  by  him, 
but  they  are  not  God  ;  they  are  in  being,  but 
they  are  so  during  the  will  of  the  Creator. 
It  is  the  dissimilarity  of  all  things  from  the 
Divine  nature  that  is  the  occasion  of  the  su- 
preme government  and  direction  of  creatures 
by  God,  because  they  are  not  his  esi§ence, 
which  is  infinite  and  unchangeable.     To  sup- 
pose the  Deity  supreme  over  himself,  is  a  use 
of  terms  without  meaning,  or  rather  a  nega- 
26 


302       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIF 

lion  of  terms.  In  whatever  sense  the  appella- 
tion Father  of  the  creatures  is  applied,  we  dis- 
cover that  the  phrase  arises  from  the  adapta- 
tion of  God,  in  the  exercise  of  his  perfections, 
to  confer  benefits  on  the  creatures  to  whom  he 
is  Father,  and  from  the  adaptation  of  the 
creature,  in  his  conformation,  to  receive  and 
retain  the  benefits  which  are  conferred.  It 
uniformly  conveys  the  notion  of  supreme  go-  J 
vernment  and  donation  of  benefits ;  and  the 
Being,  who  is  supreme,  and  does.confer  bene- 
fits, is  always  spoken  of  as  in  the  act  of  con- 
ferring, or  as  the  source  of,  benefits, — or  as 
the  director  of  these  benefits  to  their  appoint- 
ed destination.  There  must  be  an  inferiority 
in  those  creatures  to  whom  God  is  Father, 
because  this  is  essential  to,  and  inseparable 
from,  their  nature.  They  exist  in  inferiority, 
and  cannot  be  divested  of  this  inferiority,  in  . 
any  case,  or  by  any  combination  of  circum- 
stances. We  need  not  enumerate  the  various 
passages  of  scripture,  in  which  God  is  termed 
a  Father,  according  to  the  different  accepta- 
tions which  we  have  mentioned.  They  are 
so  obvious  that  there  is  no  scope  for  dispu- 
tation, or  the  introduction  of  various  mean- 


mgs. 


But  there  is  a  mode,  in  which  God  is  Fa- 


OF    CHRIST.  303 

ther,  different  from  any  which  we  have  men- 
tioned ;  in  which  his  relation,  as  Father, 
must  be  as  essentially  different,  as  the  differ- 
ence of  the  essence  in  which  he  is  predicated. 
It  is  affirmed  that  a  person  existing  in  the 
Divine  nature  is  Father  to  another  who  is 
Son.  Both  are  affirmed  to  be  Divine,  and  to 
possess  the  nature  and  perfections  of  God- 
head. The  constitution  of  the  nature  of 
each  person  causes  the  relation  of  Father  and 
Son  to  be  infinitely  different  from  the  rela- 
tion of  Father  to  the  creatures.  We  can  no 
longer  contemplate  objects  which  are  extra- 
neous to  the  Divinity,  but  must  examine  per- 
sons in  related  states,  within  the  Divinity. 
That  which  was  true  of  those  extraneous  to 
the  Divinity,  cannot  be  true  of  those  persons 
who  are  in  the  Divinity, — who  have  no  be- 
ginning, between  whom  there  can  neither 
be  superiority  nor  inferiority, — one  of  whom 
cannot  be  supreme,  or  confer  benefits  on  ano- 
ther. We  need  not  transcribe  the  passages 
already  referred  to,  especially  John  v.  and 
xvii.  In  all  these,  the  relation  between  the 
Divine  person  is  spoken  of  as  that  of  Father 
and  Son,  in  which  the  persons  reciprocally 
address  each  other  ; — the  one  acknowledging 
and  affirming  the  other  to  be  Father,  and  the 


304  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

person,  thus  acknowledged,  affirming  thu 
other  to  be  his  Son.  In  addition  to  the 
places  of  scripture  which  we  have  examined, 
we  adduce  John  xiv.  10,  11.  *'  Believest  thou 
not  that  I  am  in  the  Father^  and  the  Father  in 
me?  the  words  that  I  speak  unto  you,  I  speak 
not  of  myself :  but  the  Father,  that  dwelleth  iii 
me,  he  doth  the  ivorks.  Believe  me  that  I  am 
in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in  me :  or  else 
believe  me  for  the  very  works'^  sake.  13.  And 
whatsoever  ye, shall  ask  in  my  name,  that  will 
I  do,  that  the  Father  may  be  glorified  in  the 
Son,  20.  At  that  day  ye  shall  knoiv  that  I  am 
in  my  Father,  and  ye  in  me,  and  I  in  you.^^ 
John  xvi.  15.  "  All  things  that  the  Father 
hath  are  mine  :  therefore  said  I,  that  he  shall 
take  of  mine,  and  show  it  unto  you.^^  From 
these  texts,  we  discover  the  relation  of  the 
persons — the  equality  of  the  persons  in  attri- 
butes— and  the  inherence  of  each,  in  the  other, 
in  the  same  nature ;  so  that  the  Father  is  in 
the  Son,  and  the  Son  in  the  Father.  The  de- 
claration of  the  Son,  respecting  the  reality  of 
their  relation  and  mutual  inherence  in  the 
same  nature,  is  perfectly  decisive, — "  Believe 
me  that  I  am  ii\  the  Father,  and  the  Father 
in  me."  x4s  they  are  different  persons,  the 
being  in  each  other  cannot  mean  that  they  are 


OF    CHRIST.  305 

the  same  person,  for  this  would  be  a  contra- 
diction ;  it  must,  therefore,  signify  that  they 
are  both  persons  in  that  nature — even  in  the 
Godliead  which  is  one  and  indivisible.  Now, 
if  they  possess  the  same  nature,  and  be  Fa- 
ther and  Son  in  each  other,  they  must  pos- 
sess the  properties  of  that  nature.  As  this 
examination  is  so  important,  we  shall  repeat, 
here,  the  first  step  of  our  reasoning.  The  Fa- 
ther is  in  the  Son, — the  Son  is  in  the  Father ; 
— they  cannot,  thereby,  be  one  and  the  same 
person,  because  distinct  property  of  being  is 
attributed  to  each  person.  There  is  no  other 
sense  left  in  which  they  can  be  in  each  other, 
unless  by  a  mutual  possession  of  the  Divine 
nature.  This  is  not  a  research  in  which  it  is 
presumption  for  mortals  to  introduce  their 
examination ;  for  the  proposition  affirmed  by 
the  Son  is  expressly  propounded  by  him  to 
mortals,  as  a  subject  of  belief.  Seeing  the 
Father  is  possessor  of  the  Divine  nature,  all 
notions  of  relationship,  such  as  that  existing 
between  creatures  and  the  Godhead,  must  be 
excluded.  Whatever  the  relation  is,  it  must, 
like  the  properties  of  the  Divine  nature,  be 
eternal, — and  both  persons,  being  in  the  Di- 
vine nature,  the  relation  must  be  homogene- 
ous. We  have  discovered  t\\  o  persons  a^  ho — 
26* 


306  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

on  the  express  declaration  of  one  of  theniy 
propounded  as  an  article  of  knowledge  and  of 
consequent  belief — possess  homogeny.  It  is 
in  this  very  homogeny  that  they  are  Father 
and  Son,  seeing  the  person  of  the  Father  ex- 
ists, indisputably,  without  assumption  of  any 
creature  into  union  with  himself.  The  Son 
has  assumed  humanity ;  but  that  humanity 
could  not,  by  itself,  be  Son  to  a  Divine  per- 
son who  did  not  assume  it.  Of  the  Son,  it  is 
said,  that  "  all  things  w^hich  the  Father  hath 
are  his," — but  it  is  impossible  that  all  things 
which  a  Divine  person  hath,  can  belong  to 
any  humanity  or  any  creature  whatsoever. 
Neither  can  humanity  and  a  Divine  person 
be  mutually  possessors  of  the  same  nature  of 
which  the  Father  and  Son  are  possessors. 

Though  the  revelation  of  the  relation  of 
the  persons  of  the  Godhead  be  confessedly 
less  explicit  in  the  Old  Testament  than  in  the 
New, — yet,  there  ave,  undoubtedly,  express- 
sions  which  anticipate  to  the  Jewish  Church 
the  revelation  subsequently  promulgated  to 
the  Christian.  These  expressions  refer  to  the 
period  when  the  Son  was  made  manifest  in 
the  flesh ;  when  the  revelation  of  the  persons, 
subsisting  in  the  Godhead,  was  announced  in 
the  most  decisive  and   perspicuous   manner. 


OF    CHRIST.  307 

Til  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  this  grand  dis- 
closure of  Divine  existence  was  to  be  an- 
nounced with  the  corresponding  and  impor- 
tant truths  of  our  religion.  2  Samuel  vii.  14. 
^^  I  will  he  his  Father,  and  he  shall  be  my  *Sbn." 
It  is  said  of  tlie  Messiah,  Psahii  Ixxxix.  26, 
27.  "  He  shall  cry  unto  me,  Thou  art  my  Fa- 
ther, my  God,  and  the  rock  of  my  salvation. 
Also  Livill  make  him  my  Jirst  born,  higher  than 
the  kings  of  the  earth. ^^ 

It  has  been  objected  to  the  account  we 
have  given  of  the  designations  and  subsisting 
states  of  the  Divine  persons,  that  the  person 
termed  the  Son  is  also  termed  the  Father  in 
the  prophetic  announcement  of  Isaiah,  ix.  6, 
— consequently,  that  the  terms  employed  to 
denote  these  persons  are  only  contingent  ex- 
pressions, enabling  mankind  to  understand 
the  parts  wliich  these  persons  occupy  in  their 
procedure  wdth  men.  In  order  to  understand 
the  scope  of  the  epithet  in  question,  we  shall 
examine  the  other  epithets  and  the  design  of 
the  context.  The  verse  alhided  to  declares, 
"  For  unto  us  a  child  is  born,  unto  us  a  Son 
is  given ;  and  the  government  shall  be  upon 
his  shoulder:  and  his  name  shall  be  called, 
Wonderful,  Counsellor,  The  mighty  God,  The 
everlasting  Father,    The  Prince  of  Feace,^^ 


308  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

The  first  declaration  is  that  unto  us  a  child 
shall  be  honi,  which  evidently  denotes  that  a 
child  shall  come  into  the  world  in  the  ordi- 
nary manner.  The  second  declaration  is  that 
a  son  is  given, — not  that  a  son  is  born.  The 
distinction  is  worthy  of  particular  attention. 
The  prophet  has  already  sufficiently  described 
the  appearance  of  humanity  in  the  person 
whom  he  foretels.  To  repeat  the  same  iden- 
tical circumstance  is  an  unmeaning  redundan- 
cy, and  an  apparent  inaccuracy,  for  yvhich  we 
cannot  account,  on  the  supposition  that  the 
child  born  and  the  son  given  denote  the  same 
thing.  There  must,  therefore,  be  something 
more  in  the  import  of  the  words  unto  us  a 
Son  is  given.  The  gift  of  the  Son  is  placed 
obviously  in  contradistinction  to  the  birth  of 
the  child.  The  passage,  when  fairly  ana- 
lyzed, appears  to  convey  the  actual  announce- 
ment of  the  two  natures  which  Messiah  was 
to  possess, — the  human  and  the  Divine.  In 
exact  fulfilment  of  this  prediction,  it  is  said 
by  the  Messiah  himself,  John  iii.  16,  17. 
"  For  God  so  loved  the  w^orld,  that  he  gave 
his  only-begotten  Son,  that  wdiosoever  be- 
lieveth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life.  For  God  sent  not  his  Son 
into  the  world  to  condemn  the  world;  but 


OF    CHRIST.  309 

that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved." 
The  office  which  w^as  to  be  possessed  by  the 
child  horn  and  the  Son  given,  is  next  men- 
tioned,— "  And  the  government  shall  be  upon 
his  shoulder."  The  mediatorial  sway  and 
universal  kingdom  which  the  Son  w^as  to  re- 
ceive and  exercise  in  human  nature,  are  fore- 
told in  this  declaration.  His  titles,  describing 
his  qualities,  are  then  enumerated, — "  And 
his  name  shall  be  called  Wonderful."  In  all 
his  actions — in  the  righteousness  w^hich  he 
has  procured,  he  is  truly  wonderful,  and, 
above  all,  he  is  wonderful  in  the  glories  of 
his  person,  for  it  is  said,  '*  no  man  knoweth 
the  Son  but  the  Father."  He  is  the  "  Coun- 
sellor." He  participates  in  all  the  designs 
and  counsels  of  the  Godhead  ;  he  is  the 
Counsellor  of  all  his  people  ;  he  guides  them 
in  every  dilemma  and  danger.  He  is  the 
"  mighty  God,"  even  that  God  w^ho  is  om- 
nipotent. He  is  "  The  everlasting  Father." 
In  the  original,  there  is  no  adjective  which 
signifies  everlasting.  The  expression  is  nr  ':3n* 
Father  or  Governor,  director,  appointer  of  the 
future  dispensation  of  events.  The  following 
observations  will  evince  that  this  is  a  correct 
translation  of  the  passage: — The  word  on 
means  not   only  superintendence  in   general 


310       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

government,  but  particularly  in  religious  in- 
struction and  care.  Judges  xvii.  10.  "And 
Micah  said  unto  him,  Dwell  with  me,  and  be 
unto  me  (:i^b)  a  Father  and  a  Priest,"  &c. 
xviii.  19.  "  And  they  said  unto  him,  Hold  thy 
peace,  lay  thine  hand  upon  thy  mouth,  and  go 
with  us,  and  be  to  us  (i^S)  a  Father  and  a 
Priest."  2  Kings  xiii.  14.  "  Now  Elisha  was 
fallen  sick  of  his  sickness  whereof  he  died. 
And  Joash  the  king  of  Israel  came  down  unto 
him,  and  wept  over  his  face,  and  said,  (^3x  ^dj?) 
O  my  Father,  my  Father,  the  chariot  of  Israel 
and  the  horsemen  thereof."  The  term  is  used 
in  the  same  sense  in  many  other  parts  of  the 
Old  Testament. 

The  word  •\}\  denoting  sometimes  past  eter- 
nity, sometimes  past  and  future  eternity,  for 
the  most  part  signifies  future  eternity, — Thus 
Job  xix.  24.  "  That  they  were  graven  with 
an  iron  pen  and  lead,  in  the  rock  (n^^)  for 
ever,"  or  to  future  eternity.  Psalm  Ixxxix. 
29.  "  His  seed  also  will  I  make  to  endure 
{2)}S)  for  ever,"  or  through  all  future  time. 
We  adduce  these  from  a  number  of  texts,  for 
the  sake  of  example. 

The  real  meaning  of  the  Prophet,  there- 
fore, is,  that  the  child  horn  and  the  Son  given 
would  institute,  establish,  and  direct,  the  fii- 


OF   CHRIST.  311 

lure  movements  of  the  Church  and  world  ;  so 
that  the  New  Testament  dispensation,  mider 
his  auspices,  would  be  the  medium  by  which 
his  mediatorial  reign  would  be  extended 
through  the  universe. 

We  have  remarked,  that  the  person  intro- 
duced is  expressly  brought  to  our  notice  as 
a  Son.  The  employment  of  the  person  is 
stated  as  consisting  of  government ;  his  titles 
are  mentioned.  One  of  these  is  the  Father 
of  future  Eternity*  This  appellation  does 
not  describe  his  mode  of  existence  as  a  Divine 
person^  for  all  the  corresponding  epithets  only 
describe  his  dignity  and  attributes, — the  pos- 
session of  matchless  and  glorious  power.  He 
is  called  the  Father  of  futurity,  but  not  in 
relation  to  any  person.  He  himself  is  solely 
named  and  described.  Had  another  person 
of  the  Godhead  been  introduced,  in  relation 
to  whom,  the  Messiah  was  termed  Father, 
the  fact  would,  undoubtedly,  be  decisive,  that 
the  designations  Father  and  Son,  were  not 
indicative  of  eternal  states,  within  the  Di- 
vine essence.  But  no  such  circumstance  is 
stated  by  the  Prophet.  He  does  not  say  that 
it  is  in  the  Divine  nature  that  the  Messiah, 
the  Wonderful,  the  Counsellor,  the  Mighty 
God,  is  Father,  but  simply  that  he  is  the 


312  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

Father  of  future  Eternity,  the  Director  of 
events  in  the  future  dispensation.  He  speaks 
of  Messiah  as  God ;  but  none  that  peruses 
the  passage  with  attention  will  say  that  he 
speaks  of  this  Divine  person  in  reference  to 
other  Divine  persons.  It  is  solely  the  Divine 
person  who  was  to  be  Messiah  that  the  Pro- 
phet portrays;  it  is  that  person  in  his  own 
peculiar  character.  There  is,  therefore,  no 
possible  room  for  affirming  that  the  relations 
of  the  persons  in  the  Godhead  are  confound- 
ed, and  their  terms  employed,  the  one  for  the 
other,  indiscriminately. 

We  have  already  mentioned  that  the  su- 
preme Governor,  with  respect  to  his  crea- 
tures, is  termed  Father,  on  account  of  the 
universal  rule  which  he  exercises,  and  the 
protection  which  he  affords.  This  appella- 
tion, descriptive  of  the  connexion  between 
God  and  his  creatures,  is  true  of  every  one 
of  the  Divine  persons,  and  of  the  three  Di- 
vine persons — one  God.  The  relation  to  the 
creatures  is  as  true  of  the  Son  and  Holy 
Ghost,  as  of  the  Father,  in  the  Divine  na- 
ture ;  for  all  these  persons  are — respectively, 
and  in  union  —  the  Father  of  the  universe, 
the  Father  in  creation,  in  government,  in 
protection.     But  the  Son,  as  Messiah,  is  fore- 


tJP    CHRIST.  olo 

told  ill  his  protecting  kindness  and  mercy, 
as  "  a  Father  to  the  fatherless."  Psalm 
Ixviii.  5,  6.  *^  A  Father  of  the  fatherless,  and 
a  judge  of  the  widows,  is  God  in  his  holy  ha- 
bitation. God  setteth  the  solitary  in  fami- 
lies :  he  bringeth  out  those  which  are  bound 
with  chains."  But  neither  in  this  last  pas- 
sage, nor  in  Isaiah  ix.  6.,  is  the  Messiah  in- 
troduced in  relation  to  another  Divine  per- 
son. He  himself  is  solely  introduced, — and 
he  is  proclaimed  to  be  a  Father  to  the  fa- 
therless, and  the  Father  of  futurity.  This 
last  express,^  .1  is  a  statement  of  his  authority 
or  government  of  the  world,  and  all  the  tran- 
sactions occurring  therein,  especially  with  re- 
gard to  the  mediatory  dispensation  which 
peculiarly  belonged  to  the  Messiah. 

By  an  adherence  to  the  marked  distinc- 
tion between  designations  applied  to  the 
Deity,  in  his  relation  to  his  creatures,  and  in 
his  relation  to  himself  existing  in  persons, 
we  shall  be  readily  able  to  discover  when 
epithets  are  appbed  to  the  Godhead  generally, 
and  when  they  are  applied  to  the  persons  of 
the  Godhead.  In  the  present  instance,  the 
Prophet  describes  the  Messiah  as  ruling  all 
events  which  are  considered  as  occurring  in 
futurity.  Hence,  the  Messiah  is,  by  a  figure, 
27 


514       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

declared  to  be  the  Father  or  Director  of  fu- 
turity, especially  of  the  Mediatorial  king- 
dom. 

It  is  in  vain  to  presume  that  the  epithets 
Father  and  Son  are  communicated  to  us,  ia 
acquiescence  with  our   present  state  of   be- 
lief, and  in  accommodation  to  our  pre-con- 
ceived  notions.     We  have  evinced,  from  the 
sense  of  the  particular   passages   which    we 
have  examined,  and  from  the  contradictions 
and  impossibilities  which   would   ensue,   on 
such  a  supposition,  that  no  such  accommoda- 
ting revelation  can  be  understooa    o  have  been 
given.      But,    independently   of  the   specific 
and  irrefragable    proofs  that  such   principles 
of  accommodation  have  not  been  adopted,  it 
is   impossible,  on   general    grounds,  to   con- 
ceive  that  a  perfect  Being  could   communi- 
cate a  revelation  of  himself,  founded  on  de- 
fective and  erroneous  information.    Language 
is  the  communication  of  thought   from   one 
being  to  another.     According  to  the  nature 
and    extent   of    thought,    in   the   person    to 
whom  the  communication  is  made,  his  capa- 
city will  apprehend  and  retain  the  communi- 
cations which  are  made  to  him.     But  if  the 
person   communicating   information   be   pos- 
sessed  of  far   greater    knowledge   than   the 


OF    CHRIST.  315 

person  who  is  instructed ;  if,  in  consequence 
of  his  superiority  of  intellect,  he  accommo- 
date himself  to  the  limited  intellectual  stores 
of  the  other,  and  employ  such  terms,  and  give 
such  representations  of  the  very  object  which 
he  wishes  to  impress  on  the  mind,  as  shall 
induce  the  other  to  acquiesce  in,  and  believe, 
a  fallacy  and  an  impossibility, — his  informa- 
tion, instead  of  an  advantage,  would,  in  such 
a  case,  be  an  evident  disadvantage  to  the  less 
informed  person.  If  the  object  ^vhich  is  to 
be  revealed,  be  explained  in  a  perverted  and 
incongruous  manner, — not  as  it  is  in  itself, 
but  as  the  person  communicating  imagines 
the  less-informed  person  will  be  most  readily 
able  to  apprehend  with  his  limited  stock  of 
notions, — if,  in  addition,  the  object  be  one 
affecting  the  manners,  morals,  and  life  of  the 
person  who  is  instructed, — we  are  at  a  loss 
whether  to  deplore  the  insufficiency  of  the 
communication  or  the  erroneous  belief  which 
the  other  has  adopted,  and  which  w^ill  prove 
so  fatal  in  practice.  Should  a  philosopher 
land  on  an  island  w^hose  inhabitants  were  hi- 
therto ignorant  of  the  rest  of  the  world,— 
should  he  endeavour  to  impress  on  their  be- 
lief that  the  ship  in  which  he  arrived  was  an 
animal  obedient  to  his  will, — should  he  in- 


316  THE    ETERNAL    SOxNSHlP 

form  them  that  there  were  people  of  a  dif- 
ferent nature,  form,  and  intellect,  in  the  re- 
gions which  he  had  left,  and  that  these  people 
were  his  worshippers, — should  he,  by  his  sii- 
]}erior  knowledge  in  arts  and  sciences,  so  in- 
fluence these  inhabitants,  as  to  induce  them 
to  worship  him  as  their  God, — what  conclu- 
sion should  we  form  of  the  integrity  of  this 
philosopher  ?  Instead  of  conveying  such  fal- 
lacious sentiments,  would  it  not  rather  be  his 
bounden  duty  to  inform  and  enlarge  the  minds 
of  those  amongst  whom  he  had  arrived, — to 
cultivate  their  understandings,  as  far  as  in  him 
lay,  until  they  should  be  able  to  apprehend 
the  nature  and  uses  of  the  ship,  the  situation 
of  other  countries,  the  improvements  and 
civilization  of  their  inhabitants,  and  the  sta- 
tion that  he  himself  occupied  amongst  them  ? 
If  such  would  be  the  procedure  of  a  mortal, 
when  enlightening  his  fellow  creatures,  how 
much  more  correct,  just,  and  precise,  must 
the  revelation  of  the  Supreme  Creator  be, 
when  enlightening  his  creatures  in  regard  to 
himself?  Would  he  disclose  himself  as  Fa- 
ther, Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  if  there  were 
not  the  person,  the  Son,  eternally  subsisting 
in  his  nature  ?  Would  he  have  proclaimed 
that  the  Son  of  God  is  to  be  believed  in,  ho- 


OF    CHRIST.  317 

noured  as  the  Father  is  worshipped, — unless 
this  Son  were  eternal,  and,  as  Son,  possessor 
of  all  the  attributes  of  Godhead  ?  Would 
this  Son  have  received,  and  commanded  to 
be  paid  to  himself,  worship,  which  is  only 
the  due  of  an  eternal  Being,  if  the  Son  had 
not  himself  been  eternal  ?  These  are  diffi- 
culties, which,  we  apprehend,  the  opponents 
of  our  Lord's  eternal  Son  ship  cannot  recon- 
cile. 

The  Holy  Spirit  has  used  the  terms  Fa- 
ther and  Son,  as  signs  representing  persons. 
These,  we  have  shown,  cannot  mean  titles 
of  honour  or  office,  conferred  in  acquiescence 
with  the  notions  of  mankind,  but  must,  de 
facto^  contain  within  them  the  related  state 
in  w^hich  these  persons  exist.  These  persons 
are  subsisting  in  the  Divine  nature.  The 
Divine  nature  is,  without  dispute,  eternal  and 
immutable.  If  the  signs  representing  the 
persons  described  by  the  Holy  Spirit  be 
really  true,  and  indicative  of  the  meanings 
which  they  convey, — the  persons  within  the 
Divine  essence  are  eternal  and  immutable; 
— the  Divine  nature  is  simple,  indivisible, 
and  necessary; — what  one  person,  in  that 
nature,  possesses,  the  other  persons  must  also 
possess.  Now,  that  nature  which  is  indivi- 
27* 


318       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

sible,  must  be  wholly  possessed  by  each  of 
the  persons  inhering  therein, — by  the  one 
termed  Son,  as  well  as  by  the  one  termed  Fa- 
ther. If  the  one  termed  Son  be  possessor  of 
the  whole  of  the  Divine  nature,  he  must  be 
possessor  thereof  necessarily,  eternally,  and 
immutably ;  otherwise  the  Divine  nature  is 
not  necessary,  eternal,  and  immutable.  The 
necessity,  eternity,  and  immutability,  of  the 
Son  are,  therefore,  collateral  with  these  per- 
fections inhering  in  the  Father.  The  very 
existence  of  the  Father  exhibits  to  us  the  ne- 
cessity of  an  existence,  which  has  a  relation 
to  him  who  is  Father.  There  is  a  Divine 
person  existing  in  the  Divine  nature,  pro- 
claimed by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  be  in  the  re- 
lation of  Son  to  the  Father.  The  undisputed 
state  of  eternity,  in  which  we  believe  the  Fa- 
ther and  Spirit  to  exist,  depends  on  the  same 
evidence  as  the  eternity  of  the  Son. 


OF    CHRIST.  319 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


Opinions  of  some  of  the  Fathers,  Reformers 
of  the  Church,  ^c.  respecting  the  Eternal 
Sonship  of  Christ. 

We  do  not  adduce  an  epitome  of  the  opi- 
nions of  some  of  those  eminent  men  who 
flourished  in  the  primitive  periods  of  the 
Church,  as  arguments  to  prove  the  Eternal 
Sonship  of  Christ ; — we  only  annex  these  opi- 
nions, because  they  demonstrate  the  senti- 
ments of  many,  whose  opportunities  of  know- 
ledge, from  the  earliest  preachers  of  Christi- 
anity, were  most  extensive,  and  whose  rank, 
piety,  and  research,  are  universally  acknow- 
ledged by  the  Catholic  church.  The  number 
of  quotations  might  have  been  easily  aug- 
mented ;  but  as  tliis  Dissertation  has  already 
exceeded  its  intended  limits,  the  author  con- 
fines himself  to  the  following  selection. 

HERMAS,  who  flourished  about  the  year 
70,  writes  thus:  "  The  Son  of  God  is  more 


320       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

ancient  than  any  creature,  (Col.  i.  15.)  inso- 
much that  he  was  in  council  with  the  Father, 
upon  the  subject  of  creation. 

"  The  name  of  the  Son  of  God  is  great, 
and  without  bound  ;  and  the  whole  world  is 
upheld  by  him."* 

St.  JUSTIN,  who  flourished  from  133  to 
167,  writes — "  The  Son  proceeded  from  the 
Father  before  all  creatures,  by  his  power  and 

will."t 

In  regard  to  worship,  he  says, ,"  We  wor- 
ship and  adore  Him,  and  the  Son,  (who  came 
from  him,  and  taught  us  these  things,) — and 
the  Prophetic  Spirit,  honouring  them  with 
reason  and  truth."  t 

That  St.  Justin  understood  The  Word 
to  be  eternally  begotten  by  the  Father  is  evi- 
dent, when  he  says,  "  The  Word  of  Wisdom, 
which  word  is  itself  God,  being  begotten  by 
the  Father  of  all  things,  will  bear  me  wit- 
ness."^ 

ATHENAGORAS,  who  wrote  about  the 
year  177,  says,  "  By  him  and  through  him 


*  Burgh's  Inquiry  into  the  opinions  of  Christians  of  the  three 
first  Centuries,  p.  17. 

t  Dial,  cum  Trypho  p.  227.  B.  C. 

X  In  Apol.  ad  Imp.  p.  56.  C.—See  also  p.  60.  C.  he. 

§  Dial,  cum  Trypho  p.  284.  C.  D.  Colon.  1686. 


OF    CHRIST.  321 

were  all  things  made,  the  Father  and  Son 
being  one,  the  Son  being  in  the  Father,  and 
the  Father  in  the  Son,  in  the  unity  and  power 
of  the  Spirit. 

"  We  profess  God,  and  the  Son  his  Word, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  truly  one,  as 
concerning  power."  ^ 

Athena GORAS  farther  says,  "  As  we  assert 
a  God,  and  his  Son,  who  is  his  Word,  and 
the  Holy  Spirit,  united  in  power,  viz.  the  Fa- 
ther, the  Son,  and  the  Spirit :  for  the  Son  is 
the  Mind,  the  Word,  the  Wisdom  of  the  Fa- 
ther ;  and  the  Spirit  is  an  efflux,  as  light 
from  fire :    so  we  believe  also  good  and  bad 

angels."  t 

TERTULLIAN,  A.  D.  194—212,  says, 
*'  The  names  of  the  Father,  God  Almighty, 
the  Most  High,  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  the  King 
of  Israel,  He  who  is,  as  the  Scriptures  teach 
us :  these,  we  say,  belong  to  the  Son  likewise, 
and  that  the  Son  came  in  these,  and  always 
acted  in  them,  and  so  manifested  them  in 
himself  to  men.  '  All  that  the  Father  hath,' 
saith  he,  *  is  mine:'  why  then  not  his  names? 

^  Burgh,  p.  63,  66. 

t  Athenagoras  in  Legatione  pro  Christianis,  p.  27.  .'3.  Ed. 
Colon.  1686. 


322       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

Wherefore,  when  thou  readest  Almighty  GoS^ 
and  the  Most  High,  and  the  Lord  of  Hosts, 
and  the  King  of  Israel,  and  He  who  is,  consi- 
der whether  the  Son  be  not  demonstrated 
hereby;  who  is,  in  his  own  right,  God  Al- 
mighty, as  he  is  the  Word  of  the  Almighty 
God."^ 

"  Some  think,"  says  this  author,  "  that 
Omnipotent  is  a  title  which  does  not  agree  to 
the  Son  :  as  if  he,  who  is  to  come,  were  not 
Omnipotent.  Whereas,  the  Son  of  the  Al- 
mighty, is  as  well  Almighty,  as  the  Son  of 
God  is  God."  t 

St.  clement,  A.  D.  200,  says,  "  So 
that  the  God  of  all  things  is  only  one  good 
and  just  Creator,  the  Son  in  the  Father."! 

The  SYNOD  of  ANTIOCH,  in  their  let- 
ter to  Paul  of  Samosata,  about  270,  say, 
**  The  Messenger  of  the  Father  is  the  Son, 
who  himself  is  Lord  and  God."§ 

We  are  indebted  to  Hugh  Stuart  Boyd, 
Esq.  well  known  as  the  author  of  Transla- 
tions from  the  Fathers,  &c.  for  the  translation 
of  several  passages  in  the  primitive  Writers, 
respecting  our  Lord's  Eternal  Sonship.  These 

"   TcrtuUimi  con.  Prnx.  C.  17.  t  Ibid. 

I  L.  \.  P(cdag.  C.  8.  p.  119.  D.  Paris,  1629. 

^  F.pi'!l.  Si/nori.  Jhitioch.  ad  Paul.  Samos. 


OF   CHRIST.  323 

were  made  for  the  express  purpose  of  illustra- 
ting the  doctrine  which  it  has  been  the  object 
of  this  Dissertation  to  maintain,  and  appeared 
first  in  the  Methodist  Magazine  for  1818. 
One  translation  is  from  the  Homily  of  St. 
BASIL  "  On  The  Faiths  St.  Basil  was 
one  of  the  most  illustrious  ornaments  of  the 
Christian  Church,  and  flourished  about  the 
end  of  the  fourth  Centiu'v.  The  following:  is 
an  extract,  as  translated  by  Mr.  Boyd — one  of 
the  most  classically  correct  Greek  scholars  of 
the  present  day. 

"  I  purpose  to  inquire,  not  how  great  God 
is,  but  how  far  he  may  be  apprehended. — 
What  though  our  eyes  be  unable  to  pierce 
through  the  regions  of  unbounded  space,  shall 
w^e  refuse  to  contemplate  that  portion  of  the 
universe  which  is  accessible  to  our  view  ? 
Let  us,  then,  by  the  tribute  of  our  words,  dis- 
charge some  portion  of  the  debt  of  piety;  let 
not  the  greatness  and  the  magnificence  of  the 
argument  confound  us  in  eternal  silence.  Not 
even  the  tongues  of  angels,  whatever  they 
may  be, — not  even  the  lips  of  the  archangels, 
— not  all  the  united  voices  of  all  the  supra- 
mundane  powers,  could  worthily  celebrate  the 
smallest  part,  much  less  the  whole,  of  this 
stupendous  subject.     If  thou  desirest  to  speak 


324  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

of  God,  or  to  hear  him  spoken  of,  burst  asun- 
der the  fetters  of  the  body,  and  break  from 
the  thraldom  of  the  senses ;  leave  the  earth 
behind  thee,  leave  the  ocean  beneath  thee, 
rise  above  this  lowly  atmosphere  ;  escape  the 
influence  of  the  seasons ;  outstrip  the  march 
of  time;  regard  not  the  beauteous  fabric  of 
the  earth,  but  ascend  above  the  firmament. 
Consider  those  resplendent  orbs,  those  starry 
wonders,  which  blaze  around  thee,  which  as- 
tonish thee  with  their  harmonious  order,  their 
stupendous  bulk,  the  benefits  they  afford  to 
man,  their  wondrous  movements,  their  efful- 
gence, their  arrangement,  their  oppositions 
and  conjunctions.  Behold  the  milder  lustre 
of  the  moon,  and  the  more  gorgeous  glories 
of  the  sun.  Having  beheld  them  all,  and 
having  soared  above  them  all,  with  thy  pure 
unclouded  intellect,  contemplate  the  intel- 
lectual beauties,  the  celestial  armies,  the  cho- 
rus, of  the  angels,  the  preefecture  of  the  arch- 
angels, the  glory  of  the  potentates,  the  pre- 
cedency of  the  thrones,  the  principalities,  the 
powers,  and  the  dominions.  Having  surveyed 
them  all,  having  penetrated  creation  with  a 
glance,  upborne  on  the  wings  of  intellect, 
continue  thine  aspiring  flight,  and  contemplate 
the  nature  of  Divinity.    A  nature,  permanent, 


©F    CHRIST.  325 

unchangeable,  undeviating,  uncompounded, 
and  indivisible.  A  Being  who  dwells  in 
splendour  unapproachable  ;  a  potentate  inef- 
fable ;  a  greatness  uncircumscribable ;  a  glo- 
ry all  irradiating ;  a  goodness  all  desirable ; 
a  beauty  indefinable ;  a  beauty  which  is  ap- 
prehended by  the  ravished  soul,  but  which 
bids  defiance  to  the  powers  of  expression  I 

"  There,  in  unclouded  majesty,  are  en- 
throned the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit ;  an  independent  nature  ;  a  regal  domi- 
nation ;  an  unoriginated  excellence.  Behold 
the  Father,  the  cause  of  all  things,  the  source 
of  being  to  the  things  which  be,  the  origin 
of  existence.  From  him  proceeded  the  foun- 
tain of  life,  the  wisdom,  the  power,  the  unva- 
rying image  of  God,  who  is  invisible. — The 
Son,  who  was  begotten  by  the  Father,  the 
living  Word,  he  who  is  with  God,  and  is 
God ;  essentially  existing,  not  ascititious ; 
subsisting  before  the  ages,  not  afterwards  en- 
gendered; the  Son,  and  not  the  servant ;  the 
Maker,  and  not  the  work ;  the  Creator,  and 
not  the  creature ;  he  is  every  thing  which  the 
Father  is.  You  will  observe  that  I  say,  "  the 
Father  and  the  Son."  Be  careful  to  mark 
their  peculiar  distinctions.  He,  therefore,  con- 
tinuing to  be  the  Son,  is  every  thing  which 
28 


326  THE   ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

the  Father  is ;  according  to  that  saying  of 
our  Lord,  "  Whatsoever  the  Father  hath  is 
mine  ;"  for  surely  those  things  which  are  in- 
herent, in  the  prototype,  must  also  belong  un- 
to the  image. — We  have  beheld  his  glory, 
saith  the  Evangelist,  the  glory  as  of  the  only 
begotten  of  the  Father ;  that  is,  the  glory,  not 
of  those  wondrous  powers,  which  were  be- 
stowed upon  him  by  the  munificence  of  God  ; 
but  the  glory  of  the  Son,  who,  from  the  same- 
ness of  his  nature,  possessed  the  dignity  of  the 
paternal  Godhead.  To  receive  is  common  to 
all  created  natures,  but  to  have  the  natural 
right  of  possession  is  the  property  of  him  who 
is  the  begotten  Son.  Since,  then,  the  Son, 
by  natural  right,  possesses  whatever  belongs 
unto  the  Father ;  and  since  the  only  begotten 
hath  in  himself  the  whole,  not  possessing  any 
thing  which  is  participated  by  another,  we 
learn,  from  the  very  appellation  of  the  Son, 
that  he  is  participant  of  the  Father's  nature; 
not  having  been  made  by  a  decree,  but  ha- 
ving beamed  forth  from  the  paternal  essence, 
indivisibly  and  eternally  conjoined  unto  the 
Father ;  his  equal  in  excellency,  his  equal  in 
power,  the  participator  of  his  glory.  Tell 
me,  what  is  the  Son  but  a  seal  and  an  image, 
representing  the  entire  Father  ? 


OF    CHRIST.  327 

"  When  we  descend  from  his  Divinity  to 
his  humanity,  when  we  discourse  of  his  ma- 
nifestation in  the  flesh,  to  effect  the  redemp- 
tion of  the  world ;  when  we  describe  him  say- 
ing, that  he  was  sent  forth,  that  he  was  un- 
able to  do  any  thing  of  himself,  and  had  re- 
ceived a  mandate,  let  not  these  things  incline 
thee  to  detract  from  the  Divinity  of  the  only 
begotten  Son.  Let  not  that  condescension 
which  was  occasioned  by  thy  necessity,  be 
brought  forward  to  lessen  the  dignity  of  the 
Omnipotent.  Understand,  that  his  nature 
was  such  as  became  a  God,  and  when  you 
meet  with  any  thing  that  is  lowly  and  igno- 
ble, refer  it  to  the  economy  of  redemption. — 
The  economy  of  redemption  !  Oh !  if  on  this 
exhaustless  subject  we  were  now  to  attempt 
discoursing,  we  should  be  adding  to  our  pre- 
sent argument  an  infinitude  of  ideas,  and  an 
infinity  of  words."* 

Mr.  Boyd  has  also  translated  the  senti- 
ments of  St.  GREGORY  NAZIANZEN, 
the  co-temporary  of  Basil,  Archbishop  of 
Constantinople,  and  one  of  the  most  illustri- 
ous fathers  of  the  fourth  Century.  The  fol- 
lowing passage  is  taken  from  his  oration  "  On 

the  Birth  of  Christ :"— 

^  — —  ■ 

*  Benedictine  Ed.  vol.  ii.  h  Paris  Ed.  1618.  vol.  i 


328       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIF 

"  Since  these  things  need  a  greater  remed) . 
they  obtained  a  greater.  This  was  He,  the 
Word  of  God ;  He,  the  everlasting,  the  In- 
visible, the  Incomprehensible,  the  Incorporeal, 
the  Light  of  Light,  the  beginning  proceeding 
from  the  beginning,  the  fountain  of  life  and 
immortality,  the  impression  of  the  Archetype, 
the  indelible  character,  the  unvarying  image, 
the  Word  of  the  Father,  commensurate  with 
his  illimitable  nature.  He  approaches  unto 
his  own  image ;  to  redeem  our  bodies  he  is 
invested  with  a  body;  and  to  redeem  our 
souls  he  unites  himself  to  a  rational  soul,  that 
by  human  nature,  human  nature  might  be 
purified. — In  every  respect,  save  only  in  re- 
spect of  sin,  he  becomes  a  man,  and  is  born 
of  a  virgin.  As  God  assumes  this  nature  in 
the  moment  of  its  creation,  and  thereby  pre- 
vents its  individual  subsistence ;  from  two 
contrarious  natures  one  Christ  is  formed ;  of 
these  the  one  was  stamped  with  dignity,  and 
the  other  impressed  that  dignity  upon  it.  O 
wondrous  union!  O  ineffable  conjunction! 
The  Ever-living  begins  to  be ;  the  Uncreated 
is  formed;  the  Infinite  is  circumscribed;  he 
is  circumscribed  by  a  rational  soul;  the  inter- 
mediate link  which  connects  the  incorporeal 
nature  of  God  with  the  grosser  nature  of  ma- 


OF    CHRIST.  329 

terial  beings.  He  who  possesses  the  riches 
of  the  universe  is  rendered  poor,  he  is  clothed 
with  the  garment  of  my  poverty,  that  I  might 
be  enriched  with  the  treasures  of  his  God- 
head. He  who  is  full  of  blessedness  is  emp- 
tied; yea  for  a  little  season,  he  is  emptied  of 
his  glory,  that  I  may  participate  for  ever  in 
his  fulness.  O  w  hat  an  exuberance  of  the 
riches  of  his  goodness !  And  what  is  this 
mystery  by  which  I  am  affected  ?  I  partook 
of  the  celestial  image,  and  I  did  not  preserve 
it.  He  participates  of  my  lowly  flesh,  that  he 
may  not  only  restore  the  image,  but  make  this 
flesh  immortal.  He  is  associated  with  us  in  a 
second  participation,  w^hich  is  more  august 
and  more  astonishing  than  the  first.  For  then 
he  imparted  that  which  was  superior  to  our 
nature  ;  now  he  partakes  of  that  which  is  in- 
ferior to  his  dignity.  This  is  more  Godlike 
than  the  other.  In  the  eyes  of  all  who  can 
understand,  this  will  shine  with  a  more  tran- 
scending lustre." 

In  his  oration  "  On  the  decency  to  he  oh- 
served  in  disputations  ;^''  St.  Gregory  thus 
lays  down  the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  with 
respect  to  the  three  persons  in  the  Godhead  : 
"  It  behoves  us  to  acknowledge  one  God  the 
Father,  unoriginated  and  unbegotten ;  one 
28* 


330  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

Son,  begotten  by  the  Father ;  and  one  Spirit, 
deriving  his  subsistence  from  God ;  conceding 
to  the  Father,  the  distinction  of  being  the  Un- 
begotten ;  and  to  the  Son,  the  distinction  of 
being  the  Begotten  :  but  in  other  respects  he 
is  their  equal,  the  same  in  nature,  exalted  on 
one  common  throne,  encircled  with  one  com- 
mon glory,  and  invested  with  one  common 
dignity." 

In  his  oration  "  On  the  Constitution  of 
Bishops,^^  after  explaining  and  enforcing  the 
doctrine  of  the  Eternal  Sonship,  our  saint 
answers  an  objection.  "  I  recommend  his 
answer"  says  Mr.  Boyd,  "  to  the  notice  of 
those  who,  at  the  present  day,  object  to  this 
sublime  truth."     It  is  as  follows : — 

"  But  if,  because  mortal  bodies  are  gene- 
rated, and  born  in  time,  you  maintain  that 
the  Son  also  must  have  begun  to  exist  in 
time,  you  are  investing  an  incorporeal  nature 
with  a  corporeal  form.  And  if,  because  the 
sons  begotten  by  men  were  at  one  time  not 
in  existence,  but  afterwards  began  to  be,  you 
maintain  that  the  Son  also  was  brought  from 
non-existence  into  being,  you  are  comparing 
things  which  are  not  analogous.  You  con- 
found God  and  man,  a  corporeal  substance 
and  the  incorporeal  divinity." 


OF    CHRIST.  331 


In  later  times,  when  the  Reformers  were 
enabled  to  dissipate  the  cloud  of  error  which 
had  so  long  darkened  the  church,  their  senti- 
ments on  the  Eternal  Sonship  were  decisively 
perspicuous. 

In  the  Creed  of  the  Church  of  England, 
the  opinions  of  the  Reformers  are  thus  ex- 
pressed : 

"  I  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Al- 
mighty, maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  of 
all  things  visible  and  invisible  : 

"  And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  The  only 
begotten  Son  of  God  ;  Begotten  of  his  Father 
before  all  worlds ;  God  of  God ;  Light  of 
Light ;  Very  God  of  very  God ;  Begotten, 
not  made ;  Being  of  one  substance  with  the 
Father ;  By  whom  all  things  were  made : 
Who  for  us  men,  and  for  our  salvation,  came 
down  from  heaven ;  And  was  incarnate  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  of  the  Virgin  Mary;  And 
was  made  man ;  And  was  crucified  also  for 
us  under  Pontius  Pilate.  He  suffered,  and 
was  buried  ;  And  the  third  day  he  rose  again, 
according  to  the  Scriptures;  And  ascended 
into  heaven.  And  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of 
the  Father.     And  he  shall  come  again  with 


332       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

glorj,  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the  dead: 
Whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end." 

The  II.  Article  of  the  Church  of  England 
is  as  follows ; — 

"  Of  the  JVord,  or  Son  of  GOD,  ivhich  was 
made  very  man, 

"  The  Son,  which  is  the  Word  of  the  Fa- 
ther, begotten  from  everlasting  of  the  Father, 
the  very  and  eternal  God,  of  one  substance 
with  the  Father,  took  man's  nature  in  the 
womb  of  the  blessed  Virgin,  of  her  substance : 
so  that  two  whole  and  perfect  natures,  that 
is  to  say,  the  Godhead  and  Manhood,  were 
joined  together  in  one  Person,  never  to  be 
divided,  whereof  is  one  Christ,  very  God  and 
very  Man  ;  who  truly  suffered,  was  crucijfied, 
dead  and  buried,  to  reconcile  his  Father  to 
us,  and  to  be  a  sacrifice,  not  only  for  original 
guilt,  but  also  for  actual  sins  of  men." 

In  the  "  Confession  of  Faith"  of  the  Divines 
assembled  at  Westminster,  and  adopted  by 
the  Church  of  Scotland  in  1647, — it  is  said, 

"  In  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  there  be 
three  persons,  of  one  substance,  power,  and 
eternity ;  God  the  Father,  God  the  Son,  and 
God  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Father  is  of  none, 
neither  begotten  nor  proceeding ;  the  Son  is 
eternally  begotten  of  the  Father ;    the  Holy 


OF    CHRIST.  333 

Ghost  eternally  proceeding  from  the  Father 
and  the  Son." 

^'  It  pleased  God,  m  his  eternal  purpose, 
to  choose  and  ordain  the  Lord  Jesus,  his  only 
begotten  Son,  to  be  the  Mediator  between 
God  and  man ;  the  Prophet,  Priest,  and 
King ;  the  Head  and  Saviour  of  his  Church ; 
the  Heir  of  all  things,  and  Judge  of  the 
world  :  unto  whom  he  did  from  all  eternity 
give  a  people  to  be  his  seed,  and  to  be  by 
him  in  time  redeemed,  called,  justified,  sanc- 
tified, and  glorified. 

"  The  Son  of  God,  the  second  person 
in  the  Trinity,  being  very  and  eternal  God, 
of  one  substance,  and  equal  with  the  Father, 
did,  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come,  take 
upon  him  man's  nature,  with  all  the  essential 
properties  and  common  infirmities  thereof, 
yet  without  sin  ;  being  conceived  by  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  the  womb  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  of  her  substance.  So  that 
two  w^hole,  perfect  and  distinct  natures,  the 
Godhead  and  the  manhood,  w^re  inseparably 
joined  together  in  one  person,  without  con- 
version, composition,  or  confusion.  Which 
person  is  very  God,  and  very  man,  yet  one 
Christ,  the  only  Mediator  between  God  and 
man." 


334       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHI? 

'^  In  the  Larger  Catechism,  adopted  bj 
the  Church  of  Scotland  in  1648, — the  opi- 
nions of  the  Reformers  respecting  the  Son- 
ship  of  our  Lord  are  thus  expressed: 

Q.  "  How  many  persons  are  there  in  the 
Godhead  ? 

A.  "  There  be  three  persons  in  the  God- 
head, the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  and  these  three  are  one  true,  eternal 
God,  the  same  in  substance,  equal  in  power 
and  glory ;  although  distinguished  by  their 
personal  properties. 

Q.  "  What  are  the  personal  properties  of 
the  three  persons  in  the  Godhead  ? 

A.  "It  is  proper  to  the  Father  to  beget 
the  Son,  and  to  the  Son  to  be  begotten  of  the 
Father,  and  to  the  Holy  Ghost  to  proceed  from 
the  Father  and  the   Son  from  all  eternity. 

Q.  "  How  doth  it  appear  that  the  Son 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  are  God  equal  with  the 
Father  ? 

A.  "  The  Scriptures  manifest  that  the 
Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost  are  God  equal  with 
the  Father,  ascribing  unto  them  such  names, 
attributes,  works,  and  worship,  as  are  proper 
to  God  only. 

Q,  "  Who  is  the  Mediator  of  the  cove- 
nant  of  grace  ? 


OF    CHRIST.  335 

A.  "  The  only  Mediator  of  the  covenant 
of  grace  is  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who,  be- 
ing the  eternal  Son  of  God,  of  one  substance 
and  equal  with  the  Father,  in  the  fulness  of 
time  became  man,  and  so  was  and  continues 
to  be  God  and  man,  in  tv/o  entire  distinct 
natures,  and  one  person  for  ever. 

Q.  "  How  did  Christ  being  the  Son  of 
God,  become  man  ? 

A,  *'  Christ  the  Son  of  God  became  man, 
by  taking  to  himself  a  true  body,  and  a  rea- 
sonable soul,  being  conceived  by  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  the  womb  of  the  Vir- 
gin Mary,  of  her  substance,  and  born  of  her, 
yet  without  sin." 

The  same  doctrine  is  more  briefly  en- 
forced in  the  Shorter  Catechism  adopted  by 
the  same  Church. 

Q.  "  Who  is  the  Redeemer  of  God's  elect  ? 

A.  ''  The  only  Redeemer  of  God's  elect 
is  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who,  being  the 
eternal  Son  of  God,  became  man,  and  so  was, 
and  continueth  to  be,  God  and  man,  in  two 
distinct  natures,  and  one  person,  for  ever." 

The  celebrated  Archbishop  Leighton 
thus  expresses  himself  iii  his  exposition  of 
the  Creed,  commonly  called  the  Apostle's 
Creed  : 


336       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

"  We  have  discoursed  of  the  attributes  of 
God  elsewhere,  as  also  of  the  Trinity  which 
is  here  expressed  in  these  words :  /  believe 
in  God  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  That  sublime  mystery  is  to  be  cau- 
tiously treated  of,  and  rather  humbly  to  be 
admired,  than  curiously  dived  into.  The  day 
will  come  (truly  a  day,  for  here  we  are  beset 
with  the  gloomy  nightly  shades  of  ignorance,) 
wherein  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is.  In  the 
mean  time,  let  us  devoutly  worship  him  as  he 
has  revealed  himself  to  us  ;  for  this  is  the  true 
way  to  that  heavenly  country,  where  we 
shall  see  him  face  to  face.  And  it  is  our  in- 
terest here  to  believe  the  trinity  of  persons  in 
the  unity  of  the  Godhead,  and  to  trust  in 
tliem  as  such,  for  this  is  the  spring  of  all  our 
hope,  that  the  middle  of  the  three  became  our 
Mediator,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  our  guide  and 
teacher,  and  the  Father  reconciles  us  to  him- 
self by  the  Son,  and  renews  us  by  the  Spi- 
rit. 

"  Father.]  First  the  Father,  of  his  only 
begotten  Son  Christ,  and  through  him  our 
Father,  by  the  grace  of  adoption.  And  so 
Christ  does  clearly  insinuate  the  order  of  our 
filiation — /  ascend  to  my  Father  and  your  Fa- 
ther ;  my  God  and  your  God,  He  says,  not  to 


OF    CHRIST.  337 

our  Father,  but  to  my  Father,  and  your  Fa- 
ther; first  mine,  and  then  yours  through  me." 

"  His  only  Son.']  Other  sons  he  hath,  an- 
gels and  men  by  creation  and  adoption ;  but 
this  his  only  begotten  Son  as  God,  by  eter- 
nal and  inetfable  generation,  and  as  man  pecu- 
liarly the  Son  of  God,  both  in  regard  of  his 
singular  unexampled  conception  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  by  that  personal  union  with  the 
Deity,  which  accompanied  that  conception, 
and  by  that  fulness  of  all  grace  which  flowed 
from  that  union.  The  unfolding  of  these 
would  require  a  long  time,  and,  after  all, 
more  would  remain  unsaid  and  unconceived 
by  us  ;  for  his  generation  icJw  can  declare  ? 

'^  Let  us  remember  this,  that  our  sonship 
is  the  product  of  his.  He  is  the  only  begotten 
Son  of  God,  and  yet.  To  as  many  as  received 
him  he  gave  this  privilege,  to  be  the  sons  of 
God:' 

"  The  Son  was  fit  to  be  incarnate  for  his 
w^ork,  the  middle  person  in  the  Godhead  to 
be  man's  Mediator  with  God.  That  we  had 
lost  was  the  dignity  of  the  sons  of  God,  and 
therefore  his  only  So7i,  only  fit  to  restore  us 
to  it.  The  beauty  defaced  in  us  was  the 
image  of  God :  therefore  the  repairing  and 
29 


338       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

re-imparting  it,  a  fit  work  for  his  purest  and 
most  perfect  image,  his  Son,  the  character  of 
his  person." 

"  He^  the  Lord  Jesus,  shall  be  judge  in  that 
great  day,  the  Father,  and  Spirit,  and  his  au- 
thority are  all  one,  for  they  are  all  one  God 
and  one  judge  ;  but  it  shall  be  particularly  ex- 
ercised and  pronounced  by  our  Saviour  God- 
man,  Jesus  Christ  That  eternal  Word  by 
whom  all  things  were  made,  by  him  all  shall 
be  judged,  and  so  he  shall  be  the  .Word  in  that 
last  act  of  time,  as  in  the  first ;  he  shall  judi- 
cially pronounce  that  great  and  final  sentence, 
that  shall  stand  unalterable  in  eternity :  and 
not  only  as  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  but  withal 
the  Son  of  man,  and  so  sit  as  king,  and  in- 
vested with  all  power  in  heaven  and  earth. 
By  that  man  ivhom  he  hath  appointed  to  judge 
the  quick  and  the  dead.  This  same  Jesus  shall 
so  come,  in  like  manner  as  ye  have  seen  him  go 
into  heaven.  The  powers  of  the  world  and  of 
hell  are  combined  against  his  throne,  therefore 
they  shall  be  his  footstool  sitting  on  that  throne ; 
and  the  crown  which  he  hath  purchased  for  be- 
lievers, he  shall  set  it  on  their  heads  with  his  own 
hand.  This  shall  be  exceeding  joy  and  com- 
fort to  all  that  have  believed  on  him,  that  their 


OF    CHRIST.  339 

Redeemer  shall  be  their  judge,  he  that  was 
judged  for  them,  shall  judge  them,  and  pass 
sentence,  according  to  that  covenant  of  grace 
that  holds  in  hirn,  pronouncing  them  free  from 
the  wrath  which  he  himself  endured  for  them, 
and  heirs  of  that  life  that  he  bought  with  his 
dearest  blood." 

"  /  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost.']  God  is  both 
a  Spirit  and  holy ;  but  this  name,  personally 
taken,  is  peculiarly  that  of  the  third  person, 
proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  by  a 
way  that  can  neither  be  expressed  nor  con- 
ceived ;  holy  in  himself,  and  the  author  and 
cause  of  all  holiness  in  us. 

"It  is  neither  useful  nor  safe  for  us  to  en- 
tangle our  thoughts  in  disputes  concerning  this 
mystery,  but  it  is  necessary  that  we  knowj 
and  acknowledge,  and  believe,  in  this  Holij 
Spirit;  it  is  he  in  whom  and  by  whom  we 
believe  :  we  cannot  know  God,  nor  the  things 
of  God,  but  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  nor  say 
that  Jesus  is  God,  but  by  the  same  Spi- 
rit. We  know  that  this  Holy  Trinity  co- 
operates in  the  work  of  our  salvation;  the 
Father  hath  given  us  his  Son,  and  the  Son 
hath  sent  us  his  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  gives  us 
faith,  which  unites  us  to  the  Son,  and  through 
him  to  the  Father :  the  Father  ordained  our 


340       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

redemption,   the  Son  wrought  it,   the  Holv 
Spirit  reveals  and  applies  it."* 

In  a  recent  publication  by  the  present  Lord 
Bishop  of  St.  David's,  there  are  some  excel- 
lent observations  on  the  Sonship  of  Jesus 
Christ,  particularly  those  of  Lord  Monboddo. 
We,  how^ever,  beg  not  to  be  understood  as 
advocating  Lord  Monboddo's  general  senti- 
ments^ which  exhibit  a  strange  compound  of 
learning,  penetration,  and  genius,  with  the 
most  absurd  whims  and  conceits.  The  fol- 
lowing are  his  Lordship's  opinions  on  the 
Eternal  Sonship: 

''  There  is  another  mystery  in  the  Chris- 
tian Religion  w^hich  is  as  incomprehensible, 
by  those  who  are  not  philosophers,  as  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  is.  The  mystery  I  mean 
is  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  of  God. 
The  Son,  or  Second  Person  of  the  Trinity, 
is,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian 
Church,  eternal  as  well  as  the  Father,  from 
whom  he  is  produced:  And  this  is  what  is 
meant  by  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son. 
Now  to  a  man,  who  is  not  a  philosopher,  it 
must   appear   inconceivable   that    one    being 

*  Jerment's  Ed.  of  Archbishop  Leig^hton's  Works,  1806. 


OF    CHRIST.  341 

should  be  produced  by  another,  and  yet  he 
co-existent  with  him  from  all  eternity.  It 
is  not,  therefore,  I  think,  to  be  wondered  that 
there  should  be  such  a  heresy  in  the  Church 
as  Arianism,  or  that  it  should  have  been  once 
so  prevalent.  Now  the  doctrine  of  Arius  was, 
that,  as  the  Son,  or  Second  Person  of  the 
Trinity  was  produced,  (or  begotten,  as  it  is 
expressed  in  Scripture,)  by  the  Father,  he 
must  have  been  in  existence  posterior  to  him ; 
and  then  he  must  have  existed  in  time,  and 
not  from  all  eternity,  as  the  Father  exist- 
ed ;  and,  accordingly,  Arius  maintained  that 
there  was  a  time  when  he  was  not.  His  ex- 
pression was,  »}v  'org  ov»x  yjv.  But  ancient  learn- 
ing will  explain  this  mystery,  as  well  as  the 
mystery  of  the  Trinity,  and  show^  that  one 
thing  may  proceed  from  another  as  its  cause, 
and  yet  be  coeval  w^ith  it.  This  may  be  ex- 
plained by  an  example  which  every  man, 
who  has  learned  the  elements  of  geometry, 
will  readily  understand :  It  is  this ;  that 
every  corollary  of  a  proposition  is  a  truth 
eternal  as  weW  as  the  proposition  itself;  and 
yet  it  is  derived  from  the  proposition  as  its 
cause,  and  could  not  have  existed  if  the  pro- 
position had  not  been  an  eternal  truth. 
29^ 


342  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

"  What  has  led  Alius  and  his  followers 
into  the  error  of  supposing  that  the  Son,  be- 
ing produced  by  the  Father,  could  not  be  co- 
eternal  with  him,  but  must  have  existed  in 
time,  is  what  we  observe  of  the  production  of 
things  on  this  earth,  where  the  production  is 
always  posterior  in  its  existence  to  the  cause 
producing  it.  But  this  is  only  true  of  things 
material,  which  have  no  permanent  existence, 
but  are  constantly  changing,  being  never  the 
same  thing  for  two  moments  together;  so 
that  they  cannot  be  said  properly  to  exist,  but 
are  always  in  the  state  of  becoming  something 
different  from  what  they  are ;  ovk  i(r\i  aKKof. 
yiviroci,  as  it  is  expressed  in  Greek  :  Whereas 
beings  Divine  have  a  real  existence,  and  are 
the  T^  ovTWf  ovroc ;  and  the  same  is  true  of  all 
immaterial  Beings. 

"  But  setting  aside  things  immaterial,  there 
is  one  material  thing  which  will  illustrate 
this  matter  very  much,  and  make  it  intel- 
ligible, even  to  those  who  are  not  philoso- 
phers. The  thing  I  mean  is  the  Sun,  which 
produces  rays  that  are  coeval  with  the  cause 
producing  them :  as  w^e  cannot  suppose  the 
Sun  to  exist  without  rays.  And  this  exam- 
ple, with  the  other  I  have  given  from  the 
theorems  of  science,  proves  this  general  pro- 


OF    CHRIST.  343 

position,  that  wherever  any  thing,  by  the  ne- 
cessity of  its  nature,  produces  another  thing, 
both  the  thing  produced  and  the  cause,  or 
that  which  produces  it,  must  be  co-existent : 
So  that  if  the  cause  be  eternal,  the  produc- 
tion also  must  be  eternal.  Now,  this  is  the 
case  of  the  generation  of  the  Son  of  God ; 
for  as  production  is  essential  to  the  Supreme 
Being,  and  as  the  first  production,  according 
to  the  order  of  nature,  must  have  been  the 
principle  of  intelligence,  or  the  Second  Per- 
son of  the  Trinity,  it  was  necessary  that  this 
production  should  be  coeval  with  the  First 
Person  of  the  Trinity,  from  which  it  is  de- 
rived, and  consequently  co-eternal  with  him. 
And  in  this  way,  I  think,  the  eternal  genera- 
tion is  clearly  explained,  as  it  is  shown  that 
the  First  Person  of  the  Trinity  could  not 
exist  without  producing  the  Second.  Who- 
ever does  not  believe  this,  must  believe  as 
Arius  did,  that  the  time  was  when  our  Savi- 
our did  not  exist ;  and  that  he  was  produced 
in  the  way  of  common  generation  here  on 
earth.  Now  this  is  a  heresy  that  strikes  at 
the  very  foundation  of  the  Christian  religion, 
but  which,  as  I  have  shown,  was  an  error 
that  men,  who  were  not  philosophers,  would 
naturally  fall  into,  and  was  therefore  a  more 


344        THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP 

general  heresy,  and  more  predominant  than 
any  other  that  ever  was  in  the  Christian 
Church. 

"  And  thus,  I  think,  the  two  fundamental 
principles  of  the  Christian  religion,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity,  and  of  the  eternal  gene- 
ration of  the  Son  of  God,  are  clearly  ex- 
plained. And  as  they  are  thus  made  com- 
prehensible by  us,  they  may  be  believed,  and 
ought  to  be  believed  ;  as  I  think  I  have  shown 
that  they  are  truths  of  philosophy  as  well  as 
of  religion.  And  for  the  same  reason  that  the 
Second  Person  of  the  Trinity  must  have  been 
begotten  from  all  eternity  of  the  First,  so 
the  Third  must  have  proceeded  from  the  Se- 
cond."* 

The  following  observations  are  explanatory 
of  the  sentiments  of  the  Rev.  John  Wesley, 
A.  M.  the  venerable  founder  of  the  Society  of 
Wesleyan  Methodists, 

In  his  notes  on  the  first  chapter  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  he  says,  ''  Thou  art 
my  Son,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light.     This 


*  Tracts  on  the  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  collected  and  edited 
by  the  Right  Reverend  Thomas  Burgess,  D.  D,  F.  R.  S.  h  F.A.  S. 
Bishop  of  St.  David's,  1814,  p.  78,  &c. 


OF    CHRIST.  345 

day  have  I  begotten  thee.  I  have  begotten 
thee  from  eternity,  which,  by  its  unakerable 
permanency  of  duration,  is  one  continued, 
unsuccessive  day.  I  will  be  to  him  a  Father, 
and  he  shall  be  to  me  a  Son.  I  will  own  my- 
self to  be  his  Father,  and  him  to  be  my  Son, 
by  eminent  tokens  of  my  peculiar  love. — 
The  former  clause  relates  to  his  natural  Son- 
ship,  by  an  eternal  inconceivable  generation  ; 
the  other  to  his  Father's  acknowledgment, 
and  treatment  of  him,  as  his  incarnate  Son." 
Again,  "  By  ivhom  also  he  made  the  ivorlds ; 
therefore  the  Son  was  before  all  worlds.  His 
glory  reaches  from  everlasting  to  everlasting, 
though  God  spake  by  Him  to  us  only  in  these 
last  days." 

The  subjoined  popular  illustration  of  Christ's 
Sonship  first  appeared  in  the  Biblical  Maga- 
zine for  1801,  under  the  signature  of  Gaius, 
and  is  unquestionably  the  production  of  the 
late  Rev.  Andrew  Fuller. 

"  The  meaning  of  the  terms  Son  of  God, 
only  begotten  Son  of  God,  is  doubtless  of  im- 
portance, seeing  the  belief  of  the  idea  signi- 
fied by  them  was  made  a  leading  article  in 
the  primitive  professions  of  faith,  John  iii.  18. 
vi.  40.  XX.  31.  Acts  viii.  37.  1  John  iv.  15. 
Whatever  disputes  have  risen  of  late  among 


346  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

Christians,  there  appears  to  have  been  none 
upon  the  subject  in  the  times  of  the  apos- 
tles. Both  Jews  and  Christians  appear  to 
have  agreed  in  this :  the  only  question  that 
divided  them  was,  whether  Christ  was  the 
Son  of  God  or  not  ?  If  there  had  been  any 
ambiguity  in  the  term,  it  would  have  been 
very  unfit  to  express  the  first  article  of  the 
Christian  Faith. 

"It  is  true  that  our  Lord  was  miracu- 
lously conceived  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that 
such  a  conception  was  peculiar  to  him  ;  but 
on  this  account  it  does  not  follow  that  he 
became  the  Son,  or  only  begotten  Son  of  God. 
Whether  this  appellation  be  not  expressive 
of  his  Divine  personality,  antecedent  to  all 
considerations  of  his  being  conceived  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  womb  of  the  virgin,  let  the 
follow  ing  things  determine  : — 

"  First.  The  glory  of  the  only  begotten  of 
the  Father,  and  the  glory  of  the  Word,  are 
used  as  convertible  terms,  as  being  the  same : 
but  the  latter  is  used  to  denote  the  Divine 
person  of  Christ,  antecedent  to  his  being 
made  [flesh ;  the  same,  therefore,  must  be 
true  of  the  former.  '  The  Word  w^as  made 
flesh,  and  we  beheld  his  glory,'  i.  e.  the  glqry 
of  the  Word,  '  The  glory  as  of  the  only  be- 


OF   CHRIST.  347 

gotten  of  the  Father,  full  of  grace  and  truth,' 
John  i.  14.  It  is  true,  it  was  by  the  Word 
being  made  flesh  and  dwelling  among  us,  that 
his  glory  became  apparent;  but  the  glory  it- 
self was  that  of  the  Eternal  Word,  and  this 
is  the  same  as  '  the  glory  of  the  only  begotten 
of  the  Father.' 

"  Secondly.  The  Son  of  God  '  dwelleth  in 
the  bosom  of  the  Father,'  is  intimately  ac- 
quainted with  his  character  and  designs,  and 
therefore  fit  to  be  employed  in  making  them 
known  to  men.  '  The  only  begotten  Son, 
who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  .Father,  he  hath 
declared  him,'  John  i.  18.  If  this  be  applied 
to  his  Divine  person,  or  that  '  eternal  life 
which  was  in  the  Father,  and  was  manifested 
to  us,'  1  John  i.  2.,  it  is  natural  and  proper; 
it  assigns  his  omniscience  as  qualifying  him 
for  making  known  the  mind  of  God :  but  if 
he  became  the  '  only  begotten  of  the  Father' 
by  his  miraculous  conception,  the  beauty  of 
the  passage  vanishes. 

"  Thirdly.  God  is  frequently  said  to  have 
'  sent  his  Son  into  the  world,'  John  vii.  16. 
X.  36.  1  John  iv.  9. ;  but  this  implies  that  he 
was  his  Son  antecedent  to  his  being  sent. 
To  suppose  otherwise  is  no  less  absurd  than 
supposing   that   when    Christ   sent  forth  his 


348       THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIF 

twelve  disciples,  they  were  not  disciples  but 
in  consequence  of  his  sending  them,  or  of 
some  preparation  pertaining  to  their  mis- 
sion. 

"  Fourthly.  Christ  is  called  the  Son  of 
God  antecedently  to  his  miraculous  concep- 
tion, and  consequently  he  did  not  become 
such  by  it.  '  In  the  fulness  of  time  God  sent 
forth  his  Son,'  &:c.  Galatians  iv.  4.  The  terms 
'  made  of  a  ivoman,  ynade  under  the  law,^  are 
a  parenthesis.  The  position  affirmed  is,  that 
God  sent  forth  his  Son  to  redeem  the  trans- 
gressors of  the  law.  This  being  '  made  of  a 
woman,  made  under  the  law,'  or  covenant  of 
works  which  man  had  broken,  expresses  the 
necessary  means  for  the  accomplishment  of 
this  great  end,  which  means,  though  preceding 
our  redemption,  yet  follow  the  Sonship  of  the 
Redeemer.  There  is  equal  proof  that  Christ 
was  the  Son  of  God  before  he  was  made  of  a 
woman,  as  that  he  was  the  Word  before  he 
was  made  flesh.  If  it  be  alleged  that  Christ 
is  called  the  Son  of  God  on  account  of  his 
being  made  of  a  woman  ;  I  answer,  if  so,  it  is 
also  on  account  of  his  being  '  made  under  the 
law,'  which  is  too  absurd  to  admit  of  a  ques- 
tion. '  God  sent  his  own  Son,  in  the  likeness 
of  sinful  flesh,'  Romans  viii.  3.     This  is  equal 


1 


OF    CHRIST.  349 

to  saying,  that  the  Son  of  God  assumed  hu- 
man nature :  he  must,  therefore,  have  been 
the  Son  of  God  antecedent  to  his  assumption 
of  it. 

"  Fifthly.  Christ  is  called  the  Son  of  God 
antecedently  to  his  being  manifested  to  destroy 
the  works  of  the  devil,  but  he  was  manifested 
by  taking  upon  him  human  nature,  conse- 
quently he  was  the  Son  of  God  antecedently 
to  the  human  nature  being  assumed.  There 
is  equal  proof  from  the  phraseology  of  1  John 
iii.  8.,  that  he  was  the  Son  of  God  antecedent 
to  his  being  '  manifested  to  destroy  the  works 
of  the  devil,'  as  there  is  from  that  of  1  Tim. 
iii.  15.  that  he  was  God  antecedent  to  his  be- 
ing '  manifested  in  the  flesh;'  or  from  1  John 
i.  2.  that  '  that  Eternal  Life  which  was  with 
the  Father,'  was  such  antecedent  to  his  being 
manifested  to  us. 

"  Sixthly.  The  ordinance  of  baptism  is  com- 
manded to  be  administered  '  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,'  Matth.  xxviii.  19.  The  Father  and 
the  Holy  Ghost  will  be  allowed  to  be  Divine 
persons ;  and  what  good  reason  can  be  given 
for   another  idea  being  affixed  to  the  term 

S07l? 

30 


o50  THE    ETERNAL    SON SHIP 

^'  Seventhly.  The  proper  Deity  of  Christ 
precedes  his  office  of  Mediator  or  High  Priest 
of  our  profession,  and  renders  it  an  exercise  of 
condescension;  but  the  same  is  true  of  his 
Sonship.  *  He  maketh  the  Son  a  High  Priest;' 
'  Though  he  was  a  Son,  yet  learned,'  &c.  Heb. 
vii.  28.  V.  8.  His  being  the  Son  of  God, 
therefore,  amounts  to  the  same  thing  as  his 
being  a  Divine  Person. 

"  Eighthly.  It  is  the  proper  Deity  of  Christ 
which  gives  dignity  to  his  ofhce  of  Mediator : 
but  this  dio^nitv  is  ascribed  to  his  beino;  the 
Son  of  God :  '  We  have  a  great  High  Priest, 
Jesus  the  Son  of  God,'  Heb.  iv.  14.  His  be- 
ing the  Son  of  God,  therefore,  amounts  to  the 
same  thing  as  his  being  a  Divine  Person. 

"  Lastly.  It  is  the  proper  Deity  of  Christ 
which  gives  efficacy  to  his  sufferings.  '  By 
himself  he  purges  our  sins,'  Heb.  i.  3. :  but  this 
efficacy  is  ascribed  to  his  being  the  Son  of  God. 
*  The  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  his  Son,  cleanseth 
us  from  all  sin,'  1  John  i.  7.  His  being  the 
Son  of  God,  therefore,  amounts  to  the  same 
thino;  as  his  beins;  a  Divine  Person. 

"  Those  who  attribute  Christ's  Sonship  to 
his  miraculous  conception,  are  nevertheless 
constrained  to  allow  that  the  term  implies  pro- 


OF    CHRIST.  351 

per  divinity.  Indeed  this  is  evident  from  John 
V.  18.  where  his  saying  that  God  was  his  own 
Father,  is  supposed  to  be  making  himself  equal 
with  God.  But  if  the  miraculous  conception 
be  the  proper  foundation  of  the  Sonship,  why 
should  it  contain  such  an  implication  ?  A  holy- 
creature  might  be  produced  by  the  oversha- 
dowing of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  yet  might  be 
merely  a  creature,  i.  e.  he  might,  on  this  hy- 
pothesis, profess  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  and 
yet  be  so  far  from  making  himself  equal  with 
God,  as  to  pretend  to  be  nothing  more  than 
man. 

"  It  will  be  alleged  that  the  Holy  Spirit  ex- 
pressly attributes  the  Sonship  of  Christ  to  his 
miraculous  conception,  Luke  i.  35.  It  has 
been  thought  that  the  Son  of  God  in  this  pas- 
sage is  used  in  a  peculiar  sense  ;  or  that  it  re- 
s|}ects  the  origin  of  Christ's  human  nature,  as 
not  being  by  ordinary  generation  of  man,  but 
by  the  extraordinary  influence  of  God,  and  that 
he  is  here  called  the  Son  of  God  in  the  same 
sense  as  Adam  is  so  called,  (Luke  iii.  38.)  If 
this  be  the  meaning  of  the  term  in  the  passage 
in  question,  I  should  think  it  will  be  allowed 
to  be  peculiar,  and  that  therefore  no  general 
conclusion  can  be  drawn  from  it  as  to  the 
meaning  of  the  term  in  other  passages.     But 


352  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

granting  that  the  Sonship  of  Christ  is  to  be 
here  taken  in  the  same  sense  as  it  is  generally 
to  be  taken  throughout  the  New  Testament, 
still  it  does  not  follow  that  the  miraculous  con- 
ception is  the  origin  of  it. 

"  It  may  be  a  reason  given  why  Christ  is 
called  the  Son  of  God,  but  not  why  he  is  so. 
Christ  is  called  the  Son  of  God  as  raised  from 
the  dead,  and  as  exalted  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  Acts  xiii.  SS,  Hebrews  i.  4,  5.  Did  he 
then  become  the  Son  of  God  by  these  events  ? 
If  it  arose  from  his  miraculous  conception,  it 
could  not  for  that  reason  arise  from  his  resur- 
rection or  exaltation.  But  if  each  be  under- 
stood of  his  being  hereby  *  proved,  acknow- 
ledged,' or,  as  the  Scriptures  express  it,  '  de- 
clared to  be  the  Son  of  God  with  power,'  all  is 
easy  and  expressive. 

"  It  is  also  alleged,  that  Christ,  when  called 
the  Son  of  God,  is  commonly  spoken  of  as 
engaged  in  the  work  of  mediation,  and  not 
simply  as  a  Divine  Person  antecedent  to  it. 
Answer :  In  a  History  of  the  Rebellion  in 
1745,  the  name  of  his  Royal  Highness,  the 
Commander-in-Chief,  would  often  be  men- 
tioned in  connexion  with  his  equipage  and  ex- 
ploits, but  none  would  infer  from  thence  that 
he  thereby  became  the  King's  Son. 


OF   CHRIST.  353 

''It  is  further  objected,  that  Sonship  im- 
plies inferiority^  and  therefore  cannot  be  at- 
tributed to  the  Divine  Person  of  Christ. — But 
whatever  inferiority  may  be  attached  to  the 
idea  of  Sonship,  it  is  not  an  inferiority  of  na- 
ture which  is  the  point  in  question.  And  if 
any  regard  be  paid  to  the  Scriptures,  the  very 
contrary  is  true.  Christ's  claiming  to  be  the 
Son  of  God  was  making  himself  not  inferior 
to,  but  equal  with  God. 

"Once  more.  Sonship,  it- is  said,  implies 
posteriority^  so  that  Christ,  as  a  Son,  could 
not  have  existed  till  after  the  Father,  and 
therefore  to  attribute  no  other  Divinity  to 
him  than  what  is  attributed  by  Sonship,  is 
attributing  none  to  him,  as  nothing  can  be 
Divine  which  is  not  eternal.  But  if  this 
reasoning  be  just,  it  will  prove  that  the  Di- 
vine purposes  are  not  eternal,  or  that  there 
was  once  a  point  in  duration  in  which  God 
was  without  thought,  purpose  or  design.  For 
it  is  as  true,  and  may  as  well  be  said,  that 
God  must  exist  before  he  could  purpose,  that 
is,  that  he  was  not  God  !  The  truth  is,  the 
whole  of  this  apparent  difficulty  arises  from 
the  want  of  distinguishing  between  the  order 
of  nature  and  the  order  of  time.  In  the  or- 
der  of  nature,   the   sun   must   have  existed 


364  THE    ETERNAL    SONSHIP 

before  it  could  shine  ;  but  in  the  order  of  time 
the  sun  and  its  rays  are  coeval ;  it  never  ex- 
isted a  single  instant  without  them.  In  the 
order  of  nature,  God  must  have  existed  be- 
fore he  could  purpose  ;  but  in  the  order  of 
time,  or  duration,  he  never  existed  without 
purpose ;  for  a  God  without  thought  or  pur- 
pose, were  no  God ;  and  thus,  though  in  the 
order  of  nature  the  Father  must  have  existed 
before  the  Son,  the  Father  and  the  Son  are 
properly  Eternal." 


OF    CHRIST.  355 


CONCLUSION. 


We  have  now  finished  our  examination 
of  this  important  subject.  The  reader  will 
determine  with  what  force  we  have  adduced 
the  proofs  from  Scripture,  either  illustrative 
or  confirmatory  of  the  doctrhie  of  our  Lord's 
Eternal  Sonship.  This  doctrine  is  not  re- 
stricted to  abstract  speculation  or  ingenious 
discusion. — The  Question  is  important  to  the 
Christian  ;  because,  by  its  issue,  he  receives 
or  rejects  tenets  which  contain  the  mode  of 
existence  of  the  Supreme  Being,  in  a  certain 
manner.  It  is  important ;  because  our  appre- 
hension of  the  state  of  the  person  who  accom- 
plished our  salvation  is  involved  in  the  result. 
It  is  important ;  because  our  knowledge  of 
the  three  persons  of  the  Godhead  is  thereby 
affected.  The  first  principles  of  revelation, 
which  unfold  the  being  and  character  of  God, 
are  interested  in  the  conclusion  which  is  at- 
tained. The  Christian  Philosopher  who  en- 
deavours to  ascertain  the  consistency  of  the 
Scripture    doctrines    and    practice,   must  bo 


356  THE  ETERNAL  SONSHIP,  &:c. 

desirous  of  obtaining  the  scriptural  informa- 
tion which  teaches  not  only  that  God  exists, 
— but  the  mode  in  which  he  does  exist.  The 
humble  and  practical  Christian  must  be  so- 
licitous to  know  the  eternal  state  of  that  Lord 
and  Redeemer  who,  "  as  the  Son  of  Man, 
came  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many." 

May  the  investigation  of  this  subject  in- 
crease our  knowledge  and  love  of  him  "  who 
is  the  blessed  and  only  Potentate,  the  King 
of  kings,  and  Lord  of  lords ;  Who  only  hath 
immortality,  dwelling  in  the  light  which  no 
man  can  approach  unto ;  whom  no  man  hath 
seen,  nor  can  see :  to  whom  be  honour  and 
power  everlasting.     Amen." 


DATE  DUE 


— -- 

1 

' 

CAYLORO 

PRINTEOINU.S.A. 

